Dismissed¶20

K.N.Kandasamy Adithan v. The Commercial Tax Officer

Madras HC18 Nov 2025WP(MD)/32918/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition (Certiorari, Article 226) before Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, decided 18.11.2025 by Justice G.R. Swaminathan; petitioner K.N.Kandasamy Adithan vs Commercial Tax Officer, Srirangam Circle and Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Srirangam, Trichy District; subject: impugned notices dated 18.11.2023 demanding Rs.17,62,495/- tax for period 2001-2002 and expired 'Samathan scheme'; outcome: petition dismissed as infructuous, no costs, connected W.M.P(MD)Nos.25957 & 25960 of 2025 closed; background: petitioner's earlier appeals W.A(MD)Nos.1406-1410 of 2016 dismissed for default and not restored.

What did the court decide?

The timeline for the 'Samathan scheme' had already expired and there was nothing left to challenge; accordingly the writ petition was infructuous. ¶19

K.N.Kandasamy Adithan Vs The Commercial Tax Officer — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

W.P(MD)No.32918 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 18.11.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN

¶6

W.P(MD)No.32918 of 2025 and W.M.P(MD)Nos.25957 & 25960 of 2025

¶7

K.N.Kandasamy Adithan ... Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

1.The Commercial Tax Officer, Srirangam Circle, Trichy District.

¶10

2.The Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, (Srirangam Assessment Circle), Commercial Tax Building, Srirangam, Trichy District. ... Respondents

¶11

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records pertaining to the impugned notices issued by the second respondent dated 18.11.2023 demanding payment of tax for the period 2001-2002 of a sum of Rs.17,62,495/- and quash the same as illegal and arbitrary.

¶12

1/4

¶13

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

¶14

W.P(MD)No.32918 of 2025

¶15

For Petitioner : Mr.B.Jameel Arasu For Respondents : Mr.J.K.Jeyaseelan Government Advocate

¶16

ORDER

¶17

Heard both sides.

¶18

2.The writ petitioner appears to be a tax defaulter. W.A(MD)Nos.

¶19

1406 to 1410 of 2016 filed by the petitioner suffered dismissal for default. They do not appear to have been restored. By the impugned notice, the petitioner has been called upon to avail what is called as “Samathan scheme”. Even the time line for the Samathan scheme has expired. There is nothing to challenge.

¶20

3.This Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. No costs.

¶21

Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶22

18.11.2025

¶23

NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No MGA

¶24

2/4

¶25

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