M S Blue Stones1st Floor v. Assistant CommissionerCommercial Taxes Department
Case at a glance
Outcome
Set aside
Subject to the condition that the petitioner remits 50% of the disputed tax demand 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
Key paragraphs
- Para 66. The writ petition is disposed of on the above terms. Consequently, connected writ miscellaneous petitions are closed. There shall be no order as to costs.10-06-2026Index: Yes/NoSpeaking/Non-speaking orderNeutral Citation: Yes/NoRNAToAssistant CommissionerCommercial Taxes Department, Ambattur Assessment Circle, 3rd floor, Room No.323, Integrated building for commercial taxes…
Judgment
WP No. 19790 of 2026__________Page1 of 4IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 10-06-2026CORAMTHE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHYWP No. 19790 of 2026and W.M.P.Nos.21104 & 21106 of 2026M S Blue Stones1st Floor, Flat No. F-1, Ambattur Flats, 1,2, Redhills Road, Ambattur, Chennai, Tiruvallur, Tamil Nadu - 600 053...Petitioner(s)VsAssistant CommissionerCommercial Taxes Department, Ambattur Assessment Circle, 3rd floor, Room No.323, Integrated building for commercial taxes and registration department, Nandanam, Chennai - 600035...Respondent(s)PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of The Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling upon the records of the impugned order issued by the Respondent in GSTN 33ABHFM8988P1Z6/2019-20 dated 29.08.2024 along with Order and Summary of Order in FORM GST DRC 07 bearing reference no. ZD3308242826147 dated 29.08.2024, quash the same and consequently remand the matter to the Respondent directing them to entertain the records, documents and reply from the petitioner then pass order after affording a personal hearing to the Petitioner. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 19790 of 2026__________Page2 of 4For Petitioner(s):Mr.V.PrasanthFor Respondent(s):Mr.R.Sethu Prabakaran, Government Counsel (Tax)***********ORDERAn order dated 29.08.2024 is assailed on the ground that the petitioner did not have a reasonable opportunity to contest the tax demand on merits.
Mr.R.Sethu Prabakaran, learned Government Counsel (Tax), accepts notice on behalf of the respondent.
On perusal of the impugned order, it is evident that such order was issued without hearing the petitioner. The writ petition has been filed after the period of limitation expired.
On instructions, learned counsel for the petitioner agrees to remit 50% of the disputed tax demand as a condition for remand. An endorsement to that effect has been made on the bundle.
Operative part
Subject to the condition that the petitioner remits 50% of the disputed tax demand 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. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 19790 of 2026__________Page3 of 4After providing a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner, a fresh order shall be issued within three months from the date of remittance of 50% of the disputed tax demand.
The writ petition is disposed of on the above terms. Consequently, connected writ miscellaneous petitions are closed. There shall be no order as to costs.10-06-2026Index: Yes/NoSpeaking/Non-speaking orderNeutral Citation: Yes/NoRNAToAssistant CommissionerCommercial Taxes Department, Ambattur Assessment Circle, 3rd floor, Room No.323, Integrated building for commercial taxes and registration department, nandanam, chennai - 600035. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 19790 of 2026__________Page4 of 4SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY, J.RNAWP No. 19790 of 2026and W.M.P.Nos.21104 & 21106 of 202610-06-2026
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 50% of the disputed tax demand 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.