WP/40849/2026 of SMACTEX GLOBAL ENTERPRISES Vs The State Tax Officer (FAC) on 14 October 2026

Order

This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned assessment order dated 04.11.2025.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is engaged in the business of the Unani medical system and residential healthcare services. While so, the respondent passed the impugned orders and initiated proceedings against the petitioner on the allegation that the petitioner had availed excess Input Tax Credit. The learned counsel further submitted that due to the demise of the petitioner’s managing partner, the petitioner was unable to file a proper reply or participate in the personal hearing, under which circumstances the impugned orders came to be passed. He submitted that if one more opportunity is provided, the petitioner will file a detailed reply and contest the matter on merits.

3. Furthermore, the learned counsel submitted that the petitioner undertakes to pay 25% of the disputed tax amount to the respondent and an endorsement to that effect has also been made in the case bundle. Hence, he prayed this Court to set aside the impugned orders and grant the petitioner an opportunity to present his case before the respondent.

WP No. 40849 of 2026

4. On the other hand, the learned Additional Government Pleader (Taxes) appearing for the respondent submitted despite petitioner having been participated in the enquiry, and having filed replies, now he cannot turn back and say not actively participated. . However, taking note of the fact of petitioner’s inability to actively participate in the proceeding due to demise of his managing partner, the learned Additional Government Pleader fairly agreed to remit the matter back to the respondent for fresh consideration, subject to the petitioner depositing 25% of the disputed tax amount.

5. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, and since the petitioner was admittedly not in a position to file a detailed reply or actively participate in the proceedings. Further, it was submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that now the petitioner is willing to pay 25% of the disputed tax amount to the respondent. In such view of the matter, this Court is inclined to set aside the impugned order dated 04.11.2025 passed by the respondent. Accordingly, the following orders are passed:

(i) The impugned assessment order dated 04.11.2025 is set aside, and the matter is remanded to the respondent for fresh

WP No. 40849 of 2026

consideration, on the condition that the petitioner shall deposit 25% of the disputed tax amount to the respondent within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The setting aside of the impugned orders shall take effect strictly upon the payment of the said amount.

(ii) The petitioner shall file their reply/objection along with the required documents, if any, within a period of two weeks from the date of payment of amount as stated above.

(iii) On filing of such reply/objection by the petitioner, the respondent shall consider the same and issue a 14 days clear notice, by fixing the date of personal hearing, to the petitioner and thereafter, pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, after hearing the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible.

7. With the above directions, these writ petitions are disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected WMP.No.45820/2026 is ordered and WMP.No.45823/2026 is closed. 13-10-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No SK To The State Tax Officer (FAC) Commercial Tax Officer, Perur Assessment Circle, Dr. Balasundaram Road, CTO Complex, Building, Coimbatore -641 018

WP No. 40849 of 2026

KRISHNAN RAMASAMY J. SK WP No. 40849 of 2026 AND WMP NO. 45820 OF 2026,WMP NO. 45823 OF 2026 13-10-2026