Madras High Court
WP/36737/2026 of M/s. Moyo Enterprises Private Limited Vs The Deputy Commissioner GST Appeal on 22 September 2026
WP No. 36737 of 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 22.09.2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY
WP No. 36737 of 2026
CNR:{HCMA012018392026}
and
WMP Nos. 41171 & 41174 of 2026
M/s. Moyo Enterprises Private Limited,
Rep by its Director Mr. Mohankumar Parthiban S/o. S.Parthiban No.5, Old Mandi Street, Arcot, Vellore, Tamil Nadu 632 503
..Petitioner
Vs
1. The Deputy Commissioner (GST Appeal)
The Commercial Tax Office,
Integrated Commercial Taxes Buildings,
No.4, Bharathiyar Salai, Fort Round Road, Vellore 632 001.
2. Deputy State Tax Officer-I
Arcot Assessment Circle,
SF No. 16/34, Gandhi Nagar,
CT Building, Arni Main Road, Tajpura,
Arcot – 632 521.
..Respondents
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of certiorari to call for the records relating to the impugned order bearing GSTIN No. 33AAOCM4147K1Z6 / 2021-2022
dated 21.11.2025 passed by the 2nd Respondent and quash the same as illegal, contrary to law, unfair, defective and arbitrary.
For Petitioner:
Mr.S.Satish
For Respondents:
Ms.Amirta Poonkodi Dinakaran,
Additional Government Pleader (Tax)
WP No. 36737 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
An order dated 21.11.2025 is assailed on the ground that the petitioner did not have a reasonable opportunity to contest the tax demand on merits.
2. Ms.Amirta Poonkodi Dinakaran, learned Additional Government Pleader (Tax), accepts notice for the respondents.
3. On instructions, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner agrees to remit 25% of the disputed tax demand under the impugned order as a condition for remand. An endorsement to that effect is made on the bundle.
4. Subject to the remittance of 25% of the disputed tax demand, as agreed to, within thirty days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded for re- consideration. After providing a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner, a fresh order shall be issued within five months from the date of remittance of 25% of the disputed tax demand. Subject to fulfillment of the above condition, the bank attachment, if any, relating to the impugned order shall stand raised.
WP No. 36737 of 2026
5. The writ petition is disposed of on the above terms. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. There shall be no order as to costs. 22.09.2026 Index: Yes/No Neutral Citation: Yes/No mmi To
1. The Deputy Commissioner (GST Appeal) The Commercial Tax Office, Integrated Commercial Taxes Buildings, No.4, Bharathiyar Salai, Fort Round Road, Vellore 632 001.
2. The Deputy State Tax Officer-I Arcot Assessment Circle, SF No. 16/34, Gandhi Nagar, CT Building, Arni Main Road, Tajpura, Arcot – 632 521.
WP No. 36737 of 2026
SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY, J. mmi WP No. 36737 of 2026 22.09.2026