Disposed¶30

M s Veeranar Alloys v. Assistant Commissioner (St) (Fac)

Madras HC9 Jul 2026WP/24722/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Veeranar Alloys v. Assistant Commissioner (ST) (FAC) Nolambur Assessment Circle, Madras HC, WP No.24722 of 2026 (09-07-2026): certiorarified mandamus against tax demand order Ref. No.ZD331225129990G dated 09.12.2025; no pre-decisional hearing; belated writ cured by 25% deposit condition; remand for fresh order within 3 months; disposed, no costs.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of: impugned order set aside and matter remanded to the respondent for a fresh order after hearing, conditional on remittance of 25% of the disputed tax demand within thirty days; fresh order due within three months of remittance; connected writ miscellaneous petitions closed; no order as to costs. ¶30

M s Veeranar Alloys Vs Assistant Commissioner (St)… — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2026)

¶1

WP No. 24722 of 2026

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 09-07-2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY

¶6

WP No.24722 of 2026 and WMP No.26949 of 2026

¶7

M s Veeranar Alloys Represented by its Proprietor Mr.Dharmaiyan Rajendran, Ground Floor, No.28, Veeranar Alloys, Vellalar Street, EB Office, Ayanambakkam, Chennai 600 095.

¶8

Petitioner

¶9

¶10

Assistant Commissioner (ST) (FAC) Nolambur Assessment Circle, Room No.333, 3rd Floor, Nandanam, Chennai-600 035.

¶11

Respondent

¶12

PRAYER Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to order bearing Reference No.ZD331225129990G dated 09.12.2025, passed by the respondent and quash the same and to remand back to the respondent and direct the respondent to pass fresh orders in accordance with law.

¶13

For Petitioner: Mr.Clintli Johny for Mr.C.Bosco For Respondent: Ms.Amirta Poonkodi Dinakaran, Government Counsel (T)

¶14

1/4

¶15

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

¶16

WP No. 24722 of 2026

¶17

ORDER

¶18

An order dated 09.12.2025 is assailed on the ground that the petitioner

¶19

did not have a reasonable opportunity to contest the tax demand on merits.

¶20

Ms.Amirta Poonkodi Dinakaran, learned Government Counsel (Tax),

¶21

accepts notice on behalf of the respondent.

¶22

On perusal of the impugned order, it is evident that such order was issued without hearing the petitioner. The writ petition has been filed after the period of limitation expired.

¶23

On instructions, learned counsel for the petitioner agrees to remit 25% of the disputed tax demand as a condition for remand. An endorsement to that effect has been made on the bundle.

¶24

Subject to the condition that the petitioner remits 25% of the disputed

¶25

tax demand 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

¶26

issued within three months from the date of remittance of 25% of the disputed tax demand.

¶27

2/4

¶28

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

¶29

WP No. 24722 of 2026

¶30