S.G.Steel IndustriesRep. by its Partner V.Govind Kumar v. Assistant Commissioner (ST)(FAC)Hosur (South)-III, Hosur
Case at a glance
Outcome
Set aside
Subject to the condition that the petitioner remits 25% of the disputed tax demand, as agreed to, within thirty days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded for re-consideration
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
Judgment
Operative part
WP No. 18694 of 2026__________Page1 of 3IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 05.06.2026CORAMTHE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHYWP No. 18694 of 2026andW.M.P. Nos.19981 and 19986 of 2026S.G.Steel IndustriesRep. by its Partner V.Govind Kumar, No. 344-1 and 2, Mugalur village, Hosur, Mathigiri, Krishnagiri, Tamil Nadu – 635 110...PetitionerVsAssistant Commissioner (ST)(FAC)Hosur (South)-III, Hosur...RespondentPetition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorari to call for the records relating to the Order in GSTIN 33ABVFSO924RIZE/2020-21 dated 21.02.2025 passed by the respondent and to quash the same as violative of principles of natural justice as SCN or Order were not served as per the instructions of the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Chennai ,arbitrary, contrary to the settled law and unsustainable in law. For Petitioner: Mr.K.JayachandranFor Respondent: Mr.R.Sethu Prabakaran, Government Counsel (Tax)ORDERAn order dated 21.02.2025 is assailed in this writ petition on the ground of alleged breach of principles of natural justice.2. Mr.R.Sethu Prabakaran, learned Government Counsel (Tax), accepts notice on behalf of the respondent. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 18694 of 2026__________Page2 of 33. The period of limitation for filing an appeal has expired. On instructions, learned counsel for the petitioner agrees to pay 25% of the disputed tax demand. An endorsement to that effect is made on the bundle.4. Subject to the condition that the petitioner remits 25% of the disputed tax demand, as agreed to, within thirty days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded for re-consideration. After providing a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner, a fresh order shall be issued within three months from the date of remittance of 25% of the disputed tax demand. 5. The writ petition is disposed of on the above terms. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. There shall be no order as to costs.05.06.2026Index: Yes/NoNeutral Citation: Yes/NommiToThe Assistant Commissioner (ST)(FAC)Hosur (South)-III, Hosur. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 18694 of 2026__________Page3 of 3SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY, J.mmiWP No. 18694 of 202605.06.2026
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Subject to the condition that the petitioner remits 25% of the disputed tax demand, as agreed to, within thirty days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded for re-consideration
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.