Disposed¶28

M/s. D Nanthakumar v. The State Tax Officer

Madras HC8 Jul 2026WP/24528/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

GST remand; section 74 order FY 2022-2023 set aside; 10% pre-deposit of disputed tax demand; natural justice; GST on seigniorage deferred pending Supreme Court judgment; Article 226 certiorari; FORM GST DRC-07 ZD3306260043101; Thirukazhukundram assessment circle, Chengalpattu; fresh order within three months.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of: impugned order dated 01.06.2026 set aside and matter remanded for re-consideration, subject to remittance of 10% of the disputed tax demand within thirty days of receipt of copy of order; fresh order to follow within three months of remittance after affording reasonable opportunity; implementation of the seigniorage-related determination deferred until the Supreme Court pronounces on that issue; connected writ miscellaneous petition closed; no order as to costs. ¶28

M/s. D Nanthakumar Vs The State Tax Officer — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶28

Issue for consideration

Whether the impugned order dated 01.06.2026 is vitiated by breach of principles of natural justice. +1 more

¶18

Court's answer

Subject to remittance of 10% of the disputed tax demand within thirty days from the date of receipt of a copy of the order, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded for re-consideration.

¶22

Ratio / Principle

A fresh order shall be issued within three months from the date of remittance of the 10% of the disputed tax demand, after providing a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner.

¶22

Key takeaways

On the issue relating to GST on seigniorage, the impugned order shall not be implemented until the Supreme Court pronounces its judgment on the said issue.ratio¶27

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court (Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy, J.) disposed of a writ petition under Article 226 challenging an order dated 01.06.2026 passed under section 74 of the act for FY 2022-2023 (with consequential FORM GST DRC-07, Ref No ZD3306260043101), assailed for breach of natural justice and for imposing GST on seigniorage. The impugned order was set aside and the matter remanded for fresh consideration, conditional on remittance of 10% of the disputed tax demand within thirty days; a fresh order was directed within three months of remittance after providing reasonable opportunity. Implementation of the order on the seigniorage issue was deferred until the Supreme Court pronounces judgment on that issue. Connected W.M.P. closed; no costs.

¶1

WP No. 24528 of 2026

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 08-07-2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY

¶6

WP No. 24528 of 2026 and W.M.P.No.26741 of 2026

¶7

M/s. D Nanthakumar Rep by its Prop Nanthakumar 74, NA Anupuram, Narasankuppam, Kancheepuram, Tamilnadu 603 109

¶8

..Petitioner(s)

¶9

¶10

The State Tax Officer O/c Commercial tax officer, Thirukazhukundram assessment circle, chengalpattu, Tamil Nadu

¶11

..Respondent(s)

¶12

PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of The Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records relating to the impugned proceedings passed by the Respondent in the order vide GSTIN 33ADHPN3140L1ZM/2022-2023, dated 01.06.2026 along with Consequential order through FORM GST DRC-07 bearing Ref No ZD3306260043101, dated 01.06.2026 under section 74 of the act for the financial year 2022-2023, to quash the same.

¶13

Page1 of 4

¶14

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

¶15

WP No. 24528 of 2026

¶16

For Petitioner(s): Ms.R. Hemalatha For Respondent(s): Ms.G.Dhana Madhri, Government Counsel (Tax) *********

¶17

ORDER

¶18

An order dated 01.06.2026 is assailed both on the ground of breach of principles of natural justice and on the ground that one of the issues decided in the order relates to imposition of GST on seigniorage.

¶19

Ms.G.Dhana Madhri, learned Government Counsel (Tax), accepts notice on behalf of the respondent.

¶20

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner will remit 10% of the disputed tax demand as a condition for remand.

¶21

Subject to remittance of the 10% of the disputed tax demand within

¶22

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

¶23

three months from the date of remittance of the 10% of the disputed tax demand. As regards the issue relating to GST on seigniorage, the order shall

¶24

Page2 of 4

¶25

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

¶26

WP No. 24528 of 2026

¶27

not be implemented until the Supreme Court pronounces the judgment on said issue.

¶28

The writ petition is disposed of on the above terms. Consequently, connected writ miscellaneous petition is closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶29

08-07-2026

¶30

Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No RNA

¶31

¶32

The State Tax Officer O/c Commercial tax officer, Thirukazhukundram assessment circle, chengalpattu, Tamil Nadu

¶33

__________ Page3 of 4

¶34

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

¶35