Madras High Court
WP/38866/2026 of Steel India Vs The State Tax Officer on 6 October 2026
WP No. 38866 of 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 06-10-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY
WP No. 38866 of 2026
CNR: {HCMA012115632026}
and
WMP Nos.43609 and 43611 of 2026
Steel India
Rep by its Proprietrix Mrs Geetha
SF No. 110/3A, Kanniamman Nagar Main Road, Masilamani Nagar 2nd Street, Vanagaram, Chennai 600 095
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
The State Tax Officer,
Vanagaram Assessment Circle,
Integrated CT Building, No. 4/109 ,
Chennai- Bangalore Highways, Varadharajapuram, Nazarathpet, Poonamallee 600 123
..Respondent(s)
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of certiorari to call for the records of the Respondent in Order dated 18.11.2025 in GSTN 33AOHPG8674F1ZU/2021-22 bearing Reference No.
ZD331125318905I and the consequential rectification rejection order dated 19.01.2026 bearing Reference No. ZD3301261155012 and quash the same as illegal, arbitrary and in violation of principle of natural justice.
For Petitioner(s):
Ms.C.Rekhakumari
For Respondent(s):
Ms.G.Dhana Madhri, Spl. G.P.
WP No. 38866 of 2026
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 order dated 18.11.2025 and the consequential rectification rejection order dated 19.01.2026 passed by the respondent.
2. In the present case, a late fee of Rs.67,595/- has been levied and a penalty of Rs.1575/- each under CST and SGST Acts have been imposed for non-filing of tax returns in time.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that levying off late fee alone is sustainable in law and simultaneously penalty cannot be imposed and suitable orders may be passed.
4. On the similar issue, this court, in Tvl.Jainsons Castors & Industrial Products vs. The Assistant Commissioner (ST) Chennai (2025(2) TMI 1000), has held that the respondent authority can levy only late fee and cannot impose penalty.
5. The issue is also considered by this court in M/s.Kandan Hardware Mart vs. The Assistant Commissioner (ST) (FAC) Chennai (2026 (1) TMI 383), wherein it has been held that the question of imposing “General Penalty” under Section 125 of the respective GST Enactments cannot be countenanced in
WP No. 38866 of 2026
view of the reasons that “General Penalty” under Section 125 of the respective Enactments can be imposed only in the absence of “any other penalty” under Section 125 of the respective Enactments.
6. In view of the above, the impugned order in so far as it imposes penalty alone is set aside. The petitioner is directed to pay the late fee alone within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. The connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. There shall be no order as to costs. 06-10-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No ssk To The State Tax Officer, Vanagaram Assessment Circle, Integrated CT Building, No. 4/109 , Chennai- Bangalore Highways, Varadharajapuram, Nazarathpet, Poonamallee 600 123
WP No. 38866 of 2026
KRISHNAN RAMASAMY, J. ssk WP No. 38866 of 2026 06-10-2026