Tvl. Sri Murugan Process vs. The Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT)
Facts
The petitioner, Tvl. Sri Murugan Process, filed a writ petition challenging the rejection order dated 09.04.2025 passed by the 1st respondent, the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT). The petitioner's appeal against an assessment order dated 23.08.2024 was rejected by the 1st respondent on the grounds of limitation. The petitioner had previously filed a rectification application on 10.09.2024, which was rejected on 04.02.2025. The appeal was filed on 28.02.2025, with a delay of 69 days beyond the condonable period. The petitioner contended that the pendency of the rectification application caused the delay in filing the appeal. The petitioner also agreed to pay 10% of the disputed tax amount over and above the statutory pre-deposit.
Held
The Court held that the reason provided by the petitioner for the delay in filing the appeal against the assessment order, namely the pendency of the rectification application, appeared to be genuine. Consequently, the Court decided to condone the delay of 69 days in filing the appeal. The Court set aside the appeal rejection order dated 09.04.2025 passed by the 1st respondent. The condonation of delay was made subject to the petitioner paying an additional 10% of the disputed tax amount to the 1st respondent, as agreed by the petitioner. Upon such payment, the 1st respondent-Appellate Authority was directed to accept the appeal, hear it on merits, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with the law, after giving the petitioner sufficient opportunity. The Court expressly left undecided any issues related to the merits of the assessment order itself, as the focus was solely on the condonation of delay and admission of the appeal.
Key Issues
1. Whether the delay of 69 days in filing the appeal against the assessment order dated 23.08.2024, due to the pendency of a rectification application, is liable to be condoned under the relevant provisions of the GST Act and Rules? Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner argued that the delay in filing the appeal was attributable to the pendency of their rectification application, which was filed on 10.09.2024 and rejected on 04.02.2025. They contended that this reason for delay was genuine and sought condonation. Furthermore, the petitioner offered to pay an additional 10% of the disputed tax amount, over and above the statutory pre-deposit, to facilitate the admission of their appeal. Respondent's Arguments: The learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondents did not contest the condonation of delay and requested the Court to pass appropriate orders on terms, indicating a willingness to accept the petitioner's proposal.
Sections Cited
Article 226
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 09.02.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY & W.M.P(MD)Nos.2751 & 2752 of 2026 Tvl. Sri Murugan Process Represented by its Partner R. Uthayakumar GSTIN 33AAJFS0765K1ZZ 28B, New No.73, Sattur Road Sivakasi 626123. ... Petitioner
Vs.
The Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT) GST Appeals, Commercial Taxes Buildings Reservelane, Palayamkottai.
The State Tax Officer Sivakasi-Ill Assessment Circle Office of the Assistant Commissioner ST-3 Commercial Taxes Buildings N.G.O Colony, Satchiyapuram Sivakasi-6262124. ... Respondent Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records on the file of the 1st respondent in FORM GST APL 02 ARN AD3302250943950 dated 09/04/2025 passed by the Respondent and to 1/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis quash the same as non-speaking, illegal arbitrary and direct the respondent to admit/restore and hear the Petitioners appeal filed on 28/2/2025 on merits or pass assessment order afresh. For P
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
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.