Disposed¶22

Manickam Associates, v. the State Tax Officer

Madras HC10 Jul 2026WP/24798/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court; WP No. 24798 of 2026 and WMP.Nos.27027 & 27028 of 2026; Manickam Associates v. State Tax Officer, Mettupalayam Road Assessment Circle, Coimbatore; GST assessment 2021-2022 (GSTIN 33DQEPS9506N1Z8); breach of natural justice; expired appeal limitation; remand conditioned on payment of 25% of disputed tax demand; fresh order within three months; Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy; decided 10-07-2026.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 05.12.2025 set aside and matter remanded for re-consideration, subject to remittance of 25% of the disputed tax demand within thirty days; fresh order to be issued within three months of remittance; connected miscellaneous petitions closed; no order as to costs. ¶22

Manickam Associates, Vs the State Tax Officer — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2026)

¶1

WP No. 24798 of 2026

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 10-07-2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY

¶6

WP No. 24798 of 2026 and WMP.Nos.27027 & 27028 of 2026

¶7

M/s.Manickam Associates, Rep by its proprietor, Sri. M. Suresh, No 1, Daya Gardents, Singanallur, Coimbatore 641 005.

¶8

..Petitioner

¶9

¶10

The State Tax Officer Mettupalayam Road Assessment Circle, Coimbatore.

¶11

..Respondent

¶12

Prayer : Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorari to call for the records of the respondent in his proceeding in GSTIN - 33DQEPS9506N1Z8/2021-2022 and quash the proceeding dated 05.12.2025 passed therein.

¶13

For Petitioner: Mr. M. Parvesh Musharaf For Respondent: Mr. R. Sethu Prabakaran Government Counsel (Tax)

¶14

ORDER

¶15

An order dated 05.12.2025 is assailed in this writ petition on the ground of alleged breach of principles of natural justice.

¶16

Page1 of 4

¶17

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

¶18

WP No. 24798 of 2026

¶19

Mr. R.Sethu Prabakaran, learned Government Counsel (Tax), accepts notice on behalf of the respondent.

¶20

The period of limitation for filing an appeal has expired. On instructions, learned counsel for the petitioner agrees to pay 25% of the disputed tax demand as a condition for remand. An endorsement to that effect is made on the bundle.

¶21

Subject to the condition that the petitioner remits 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 three months from the date of remittance of 25% of the disputed tax demand.

¶22