Disposed¶27

Tvl Annanmar Blue Metals v. Deputy State Tax Officer

Madras HC20 Nov 2025WP/24706/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court; W.P.No.24706 of 2025; Tvl Annanmar Blue Metals v. Deputy State Tax Office-1 Krishnagiri-II & Deputy Commissioner (CT)(Appeals) Salem; Justice C. Saravanan; 20.11.2025; Article 226 certiorari; Section 74 GST enactments; tax period 2019-2020; order ref ZD330324075029J dated 14.03.2024; appeal rejected on limitation; 5-day delay; limitation expired 13.06.2024, appeal filed 18.06.2024; 10% pre-deposit; further recovery; direction to decide appeal on merits ignoring limitation; bank account attachment lifted; writ petition disposed; W.M.P.No.27864 of 2025 closed; no costs.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of: 2nd respondent directed to hear and decide the appeal on merits without reference to limitation; attachment of petitioner's bank account lifted; connected miscellaneous petition closed; no costs.

Tvl Annanmar Blue Metals Vs Deputy State Tax Officer — GST and Indirect Tax | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶27

Issue for consideration

Whether the impugned order dated 14.03.2024 (ref. ZD330324075029J) passed under Section 74 of the respective GST enactments for tax period 2019-2020 is arbitrary, violative of natural justice, and liable to be quashed. +1 more

¶11

Ratio / Principle

In view of the petitioner having pre-deposited 10% of the disputed tax on 18.06.2024, a further recovery having been made after the assessment order, and the delay in filing the appeal being only marginal (5 days), the 2nd respondent is directed to consider the matter afresh and dispose of the appeal on merits after hearing the petitioner, without reference to the aspect of limitation.

¶24

Key takeaways

Since there has been a further recovery pursuant to the order impugned in the writ petition, the attachment on the petitioner's bank account shall stand lifted.ratio¶26

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court (C. Saravanan, J.) disposed of a writ petition (Art. 226, certiorari) by Tvl Annanmar Blue Metals challenging an order dated 14.03.2024 (ref. ZD330324075029J) passed by the Deputy State Tax Office – 1, Krishnagiri-II under Section 74 of the respective GST enactments for tax period 2019-2020. The petitioner's appeal before the Deputy Commissioner (CT)(Appeals), Salem had been rejected as barred by limitation — the appeal was filed on 18.06.2024 against a last date of 13.06.2024, a delay of 5 days. Noting that the petitioner had pre-deposited 10% of the disputed tax on 18.06.2024, that a further recovery had been made after the assessment order, and that the delay was only marginal, the Court directed the appellate authority to consider the matter afresh and dispose of the appeal on merits after hearing the petitioner without reference to limitation. As a further recovery had been made pursuant to the impugned order, the attachment on the petitioner's bank account was lifted. Connected miscellaneous petition closed; no costs.

¶1

W.P.No.24706 of 2025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 20.11.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN

¶6

W.P.No.24706 of 2025 and W.M.P.No.27864 of 2025

¶7

Tvl Annanmar Blue Metals, Represented by its Partner P.S.Saravanan 40, Sathalapalli, B.G.R Madawpalli, Krishnagiri – 635 104. ... Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

Deputy State Tax Office – 1, Krishnagiri-II, SF.No 559/5, Ground Floor, Kallukkurukki Village, Saamanthamalai Post, Ramapuram (SO), Collector Office Backside, Krishnagiri – 635 115.

¶10

Deputy Commissioner (CT)(Appeals), Commercial Taxes Complex, Pitchards Road, Asthampatti, Salem – 636 007. ... Respondents

¶11

Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records relating to the impugned order bearing reference number ZD330324075029J dated 14.03.2024 passed by the 1^st respondent and quash the same as the same being arbitrary, passed in violation of the principles of natural justice.

¶12

1/6

¶13

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶14

W.P.No.24706 of 2025

¶15

For Petitioner : Mr.G.Natarajan For Respondents : Mr.V.Prashanth Kiran Government Advocate

¶16

ORDER

¶17

In this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the impugned Order dated 14.03.2024 passed by the 1^st respondent under Section 74 of the respective GST enactments, for the tax period 2019-2020.

¶18

It is noticed that the petitioner has already filed an appeal before the 2^nd respondent / appellate commissioner against the impugned Order dated 14.03.2024, which has been rejected on the ground of limitation.

¶19

It is also noticed that there is a marginal delay in filing the appeal before the 2^nd respondent.

¶20

The last date for filing an appeal within the limitation period expired on 13.06.2024. However, the petitioner filed the appeal on 18.06.2024. Thus, there is a marginal delay of 5 days in filing the appeal against the impugned Order dated 14.03.2024.

¶21

2/6

¶22

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶23

W.P.No.24706 of 2025

¶24

Considering the fact that the petitioner has already pre-deposited 10% of the disputed tax on 18.06.2024, and that a further recovery has been made after the assessment order was passed, and also that the delay in filing the appeal was only marginal, there shall be a direction to the 2^nd respondent to consider the matter afresh and dispose of the appeal on merits after hearing the petitioner without reference to the aspect of limitation.

¶25