Madras High Court
WP/40147/2026 of ANANDHAN RAJESH Vs Deputy Commercial Tax Officer on 12 October 2026
WP No. 40147 of 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 12-10-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY
WP No. 40147 of 2026
and WMP. Nos.45072 and 45073 of 2026
CNR: {HCMA012264642026}
Anandhan Rajesh
TRADE NAME SREE FLYASH BRICKS AND PVING BLOCKS
No.203/2, Kilikodi Village, Kavaripettai, Tiruvallur, Tamil Nadu 601 206
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
Deputy Commercial Tax Officer
Gummidipoondi Tiruvallur
Tiruvallur Tamil Nadu
..Respondent(s)
PRAYER: The Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of Order of Assessment in DRC-07 bearing Reference NoZD331225052109P in GSTIN/ID33ARIPR5427K1ZG / APR 2021 - MAR
2022 dated 03.12.2025 passed by the respondent and to quash the same and to further direct the petitioner to pass fresh orders of assessment after granting an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner.
WP No. 40147 of 2026
For Petitioner(s):
Mr. G.Maharajan
For Respondent(s):
Ms. G. Dhanamadhri
Special Government Pleader (T)
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
The present Writ Petition has been filed challenging the order passed by the respondent dated 03.12.2025.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had requested time to file a reply by way of a letter dated 23.07.2025. However, without providing a sufficient opportunity, the respondent passed the impugned order in violation of the principles of natural justice. Hence, he contends that the same is unsustainable.
3. The learned Special Government Pleader (T) appearing for the respondent submits that while the request for extension was made on 23.07.2025, the respondent subsequently issued three reminders granting the petitioner time to file the reply. The impugned order was passed on 03.12.2025,
WP No. 40147 of 2026 after a lapse of nearly five months. Therefore, the fault lies entirely with the petitioner for failing to file the reply in time.
4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made on either side, this Court finds merit in the contention of the learned Special Government Pleader (T). The record reflects that after the petitioner sought time on 23.07.2025, three reminders were sent on 30.08.2025, 19.11.2025, and 25.11.2025. Despite these reminders, the petitioner failed to file a reply, leading to the issuance of the impugned order on 03.12.2025. Consequently, this Court is of the view that there is no infirmity in the decision- making process. The respondent made diligent efforts by issuing multiple notices and reminders, which the petitioner failed to utilise. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to entertain the Writ Petition on merits.
5. At this juncture, the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks leave of this Court to challenge the impugned order by way of an appeal before the Appellate Authority. Acknowledging the delay, he submits that the petitioner is ready and willing to pay an additional 15% of the disputed tax amount, over and above the statutory pre-deposit required for filing the appeal, and has made an endorsement in the Court bundle to that effect.
WP No. 40147 of 2026
6. The learned Special Government Pleader (T) appearing for the respondent submits that if the petitioner deposits the additional 15% of the disputed tax amount over and above the statutory pre-deposit, the delay may be condoned and liberty may be granted to file the appeal.
7. Recording the said submissions, this Writ Petition is dismissed, with liberty granted to the petitioner to file an appeal before the Appellate Authority, subject to the condition that the petitioner pays an additional 15% of the disputed tax amount over and above the mandatory statutory pre-deposit within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
8. Recording the said submissions, this Writ Petition is dismissed, with liberty granted to the petitioner to file an appeal before the Appellate Authority along with an appropriate application for condonation of delay, subject to the condition that the petitioner pays an additional 15% of the disputed tax amount over and above the mandatory statutory pre-deposit within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Upon fulfillment of this condition, the Appellate Authority is directed to condone the delay, take the appeal on record, and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with
WP No. 40147 of 2026 law, after providing a sufficient opportunity of being heard to the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible. There shall be no order as to costs. W.M.P.No.45072 of 2026 filed to dispense with the production of the original impugned order, is allowed. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. 12-10-2026 Asi To The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Gummidipoondi Tiruvallur, Tiruvallur Tamil Nadu.
WP No. 40147 of 2026 KRISHNAN RAMASAMY, J. Asi WP No. 40147 of 2026 and WMP. Nos.45072 and 45073 of 2026 12-10-2026