Madras High Court
WP/37553/2026 of M/s MLF Traders Vs The Assistant Commissioner ST FAC on 30 September 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 30-09-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY
WP Nos. 37553 and 37560 of 2026
and
WMP Nos. 42171 and 42174 of 2026
CNR:{HCMA012115752026}
CNR:{HCMA012115762026}
In both Writ Petitions:
M/s MLF Traders
Represented by its Proprietor
Fayaz Ahmed Meerlabbai, First Floor, No. 1088/3, P.J. Nehru Road, Vaniyambadi, Vellore 635 751.
..Petitioner
Vs
The Assistant Commissioner (ST) (FAC),
Vaniyambadi Assessment Circle,
Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru Road,
Court complex, Vaniyambadi 635 751.
..Respondent
Prayer in WP No. 37553 of 2026: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records of the respondent in his proceedings in GSTIN
33ADEPF1875H1ZS/2021-2220, quash the order dated 08.01.2026 passed therein for the financial year 2019-2020.
Prayer in WP No. 37560 of 2026: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records of the respondent in his proceedings in GSTIN.
33ADEPF1875H1ZS/2020-2021, quash the order dated 09.01.2026 passed therein.
For Petitioner in both WPs:
Mr. P.V.Sudakar
For Respondent in both WPs:
Mr. R. Sethu Prabakaran,
Government Advocate (Tax)
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.
COMMON ORDER
Orders dated 08.01.2026 and 09.01.2026 in relation to assessment periods 2019 – 2020 & 2020 - 2021, respectively, are assailed in these writ petitions on the ground that the orders are non–speaking.
2. Adverting to the replies and documents annexed thereto, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that these replies and the documents annexed thereto were not taken into consideration by the proper officer. He draws reference to the operative paragraphs of the impugned orders.
3. Mr. R. Sethu Prabakaran, learned Government Advocate (Tax), accepts notice for the respondent. He submits that the petitioner has approached this Court belatedly.
4. On perusal of the impugned orders, it is evident that no reasons supporting the conclusions were recorded. Instead, the proper officer merely recorded that the reply of the tax payer is not accepted. Nonetheless, as contented by learned Government Advocate, the petitioner has approached this Court beyond the statutory period of limitation for filing appeals.
5. On instructions, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner agrees to pay 10% of the tax demand under each order as a condition for remand. He has made an endorsement on the bundle to that effect.
6. For reasons set out above, the impugned orders are set aside on condition that the petitioner remits 10% of the tax demand under each order within thirty days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. After providing a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner, fresh orders shall be issued within five months from the date of remittance of 10% of the tax demand in the manner specified above.
SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY J. KJ
7. The writ petitions are disposed of on the above terms. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. There shall be no order as to costs. 30-09-2026 Index: Yes/No Neutral Citation: Yes/No KJ/ARL To The Assistant Commissioner (ST) (FAC), Vaniyambadi Assessment Circle, Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru Road, Court complex, Vaniyambadi 635 751. WP Nos. 37553 and 37560 of 2026 and WMP Nos. 42171 and 42174 of 2026 (1/2)