Tvl Sri Valliamman Enterprises Represented By Its vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer 1
Facts
The petitioner, Tvl Sri Valliamman Enterprises, filed a writ petition challenging an assessment order dated 29.06.2024 passed by the Deputy State Tax Officer and the subsequent rejection of their appeal by the Appellate Deputy Commissioner CT on 20.03.2025. The appeal was dismissed on the grounds of limitation. The petitioner argued that the delay in filing the appeal was marginal and that they had arguable points to present before the appellate authority. The tax period in question is 2019-20. The amount in dispute is not explicitly stated. The procedural history involves an initial assessment order, followed by an appeal to the appellate authority, which was dismissed due to delay, leading to the present writ petition.
Held
The Court held that the delay in filing the appeal before the appellate authority was marginal. It also observed that the petitioner had arguable points to present. In the interest of justice, the Court quashed the order of the Appellate Deputy Commissioner CT, which had dismissed the appeal on the grounds of limitation. The Court directed the appellate authority to number the appeal and dispose of it on its merits and in accordance with the law. The ratio decidendi is that where the delay in filing an appeal is marginal and the appellant has arguable points, the appellate authority should consider the appeal on merits to ensure justice, rather than dismissing it solely on procedural grounds of limitation, especially when exercising writ jurisdiction.
Key Issues
1. Whether the Appellate Deputy Commissioner CT was justified in rejecting the appeal on the grounds of limitation, considering the marginal delay and the existence of arguable points by the petitioner, as contemplated under Article 226 of the Constitution of India? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the delay in filing the appeal before the appellate authority was marginal and that they possessed arguable points that warranted consideration on merits. They sought a direction for the appellate authority to number the appeal and decide it on its merits, emphasizing the interest of justice. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific arguments presented by the respondents (Revenue).
Sections Cited
Section 75(4)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 23-10-2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN and WMP(MD)Nos.23022 & 23023 of 2025 1.Tvl Sri Valliamman Enterprises Rep.by its Authorised Signatory R.Nithya GSTIN 33ATNPR2628B1ZT No. 47/1, S.M.R.Complex, Ganeshapuram, Trichy Main Road, Puliyurkarur TK, Karur-639114. ... Petitioner Vs. 1.The Deputy State Tax Officer 1, Karur-4 Assessment Circle, C.T.Buildings, Karur. 2.The Appellate Deputy Commissioner CT, Commercial Taxes Buildings, Erode. ...Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of CERTIORARIFIED MANDAMUS to call for the records on the file of the 1st Respondent in GSTIN 33ATNPR2628B1ZT /2019-20 dated 29/06/2024 and consequential rejection of appeal vide proceedings dated 20/03/2025 in (ARN AD330325010526J) for the assessment year 2019-20 - issued by the 2nd respondent in Form GST APL-02 and to quash the both as cryptic, non- speaking, illegal , arbitrary, wholly without juri iction and direct the respondent to pass order afresh after
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.