Madras High Court
WP/35870/2026 of M/s.GVR Ashoka Chennai ORR Limited Vs The Assistant Commissioner (ST) on 8 October 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 08-10-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY
WP No. 35870 of 2026
CNR:{HCMA012029402026}
AND
WMP NO. 40111 OF 2026,WMP NO. 40112 OF 2026
M/s.GVR Ashoka Chennai ORR Limited
Represented by its Authorized Signatory
Umasankar Muthuraman
No.133, Administrative Block,
400 ft. Road, Chinnamullalvoyal Toll Plaza Tiruvallur, Tamil Nadu-600 103
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
1. The Assistant Commissioner (ST)
Cholavaram Assessment Circle
Room No.109, I Floor,
Integrated Commercial Taxes Complex,
Tiruvallur Division,
Chennai-03
2. Deputy Commissioner (ST) Appeals
Commercial Taxes Annexure Building,
3rd Floor, Greams Road,
Chennai, Tamil nadu-600 006
..Respondent(s)
Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of writ of mandamus calling for the records relating to the recovery proceedings in TIN 33821706307 / 2016 - 17 dated 27.07.2026 on the file of the 1st respondent and quash the same and consequently direct the 1st respondent to keep all recovery proceedings in abeyance till the appeal is decided For Petitioner(s):
Mr.C.Harsha Raj for M/s.Raj and Raj Associates
( Uploaded on: 26/10/2026 01:13:56 pm )
For Respondent(s):
Mr.B.Sivaraman, Government Advocate(Taxes)
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
This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the impugned recovery notice dated 27.07.2026 issued by the 1st respondent.
2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner suffered an assessment order for alleged suppression of turnover, raising a tax demand of Rs. 3,76,45,256/- and a penalty of Rs. 5,64,67,902/-. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner filed a batch of writ petitions in W.P. Nos. 35479, 35482, 35764, and 24479/2024, wherein this Court directed the petitioner to prefer an appeal against the assessment order and left the question of condonation of delay open to be decided by the appellate authority. Thereafter, the petitioner preferred an appeal on 04.01.2025, which was rejected on the ground of a delay of 246 days.
3. Hence, the petitioner preferred a writ appeal in W.A. No. 1609/2025 against the order passed in the said batch of writ petitions, to the extent of seeking condonation of delay. The Hon’ble Division Bench, vide an order dated 11.06.2025, condoned the delay of 246 days, restored the appeal, and directed the Joint Commissioner (ST) to dispose of the same. In compliance, the
( Uploaded on: 26/10/2026 01:13:56 pm )
petitioner appeared before the Joint Commissioner and submitted a detailed reply on 07.11.2025. However, the said authority did not proceed further, informing the petitioner that the Joint Commissioner is not the competent authority to decide the appeal, being a revisional authority instead.
4. Consequently, the petitioner moved a modification application seeking permission to appear before the Appellate Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes. While things stood thus, the 1st respondent issued the impugned recovery notice dated 27.07.2026 demanding payment of arrears. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.
5. The learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents submitted that the Joint Commissioner (ST) is not the competent authority to decide the appeal as they are only a revisional authority.
6. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.
7. The order of the Hon’ble Division Bench was meant for the competent appellate authority. If the Joint Commissioner is not the appellate authority, that order will apply to the actual appellate authority, who is none other than the 2nd respondent in the present writ petition. Such being the case, the 2nd respondent is bound to conduct an enquiry and dispose of the appeal in accordance with
( Uploaded on: 26/10/2026 01:13:56 pm )
law.
8. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that he is not pressing the issue of service of notice and is ready to argue the matter on merits before the appellate authority. In view of the same, the 2nd respondent is directed to pass appropriate orders on merits, after affording an opportunity of a personal hearing to the petitioner, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Until then, the respondents shall defer all recovery proceedings pursuant to the impugned recovery notice.
9. With the above observations, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs. Consequently, W.M.P. No. 40111/2026 is allowed and W.M.P. No. 40112/2026 is closed. 08-10-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No SK To
1. The Assistant Commissioner (ST) Cholavaram Assessment Circle Room No.109, I Floor, Integrated Commercial Taxes Complex, Tiruvallur Division, Chennai-03.
( Uploaded on: 26/10/2026 01:13:56 pm )
2. Deputy Commissioner (ST) Appeals Commercial Taxes Annexure Building, 3rd Floor, Greams Road, Chennai, Tamil nadu-600 006
( Uploaded on: 26/10/2026 01:13:56 pm )
KRISHNAN RAMASAMY J. SK WP No. 35870 of 2026 AND WMP NO. 40111 OF 2026,WMP NO. 40112 OF 2026 08-10-2026
( Uploaded on: 26/10/2026 01:13:56 pm )