Tvl. Spr Enterprises vs. The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer Ii

Original PDF →
WP(MD)/17648/2026HC MadrasGSTCNR HCMD01083196202624 June 2026Bench: HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY6 pages

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Before: and Dr. Thangaraj Salai,

The present writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned order dated 12.04.2023. 2. Heard Mr.A.Satheesh Murugan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.P.Rajagopalan, learned Government Standing Counsel, who takes notice on behalf of the respondent.

3.

The crux of the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is that when there was a default on the part of the petitioner in filing the return, the impugned order of assessment is passed under Section 62 of the Act. Subsequently, when the petitioner has filed the returns, it is the duty of the officer to consider the same. 2 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

4.

The learned counsel would rely upon the judgments of this Court in Tvl.T.Vijayakumar V. The Deputy State Tax Officer, Nagercoil,(W.P(MD) No.26727 of 2025), The Comfort Shoe Components, rep., by its Proprietor V Assistant Commissioner, Ambur, Vellore(2024(1) TMI 281, M/s.Om Ganapathi Cranes and Earth Movers, Rep., by its Proprietor V The Deputy State Officer-II cum The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Tindivanam(W.P.No.35200 of 2025).

5.

Per Contra, the learned Government Standing Counsel would submit that the proviso categorically contains an outer condonable limit and therefore, it cannot be held to be directory. The department has already filed an appeal against the above said judgment before the Division Bench along with prayer to condonation of delay and the same is pending at the condonation of delay stage. He would submit that this Court need not accept the said interpretation.

6.

I have considered the rival submissions made on either side and perused the material records of the case. 3 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

7.

It can be seen that consistently this Court has been taking a view that the period is only directory and once the return is filed even belatedly, the assessment order should no longer survive. In view of the consistent view taken, I do not see compelling reasons to differ from the binding precedents that are cited before this Court and accordingly, this writ petition shall also stands allowed in view of the law laid down in the aforementioned judgments. Accordingly, the impugned order stands quashed and the matter shall be considered appropriately by the respondent while making further assessment for the year. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 24.06.2026 NCC:Yes/No rgm 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis To The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer II, Melur Assessment Circle, Commercial Taxes Buildings, Dr. Thangaraj Salai, Madurai 625 020. 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY

, J.

rgm and W.M.P(MD)No.13046 of 2026 24.06.2026 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Reproduced from the public record of the Madras High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.