SM NETWORK Represented by its Proprietor MR.RAJARATHINAM PRABHAKARAN PANNEERSELVAM K vs The Deputy State Tax Officer (Formerly known as Deputy Commercial Tax Officer ) — WP/17428/2026

Case under Others Section 1. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED OF on 02nd June 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: HCMA010873872026

e-Filing Number

09-04-2026

Filing Number

WP/64677/2026

Filing Date

09-Apr-2026

Registration No

WP/17428/2026

Registration Date

28-Apr-2026

Judge

Honourable Mr Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy

Coram

Honourable Mr Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

Tax/Tolls ( 150 )

Judicial Branch

WRITSECTION

Decision Date

02-Jun-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISPOSED OF

Last updated 03-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Others Section 1

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SM NETWORK Represented by its Proprietor MR.RAJARATHINAM PRABHAKARAN PANNEERSELVAM K

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.The Deputy State Tax Officer (Formerly known as Deputy Commercial Tax Officer )

  2. 2.The Assisstant Commissioner (ST) (FAC)

  3. 3.The Branch Manager, Union Bank of Inida

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 02-Jun-2026

    Honourable Mr Justice Senthilkumar RamamoorthyView PDF

    The Madras High Court set aside a tax assessment order dated 21.06.2025 against S.M. Network, finding the petitioner lacked reasonable opportunity to contest the tax demand after being unaware of proceedings. The court remanded the matter for reconsideration on condition that the petitioner pay 25% of disputed tax within 30 days, after which tax authorities must issue a fresh order within three months providing full opportunity to be heard, and any bank account attachment shall be released. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 02-Jun-2026

    For Admission

    Honourable Mr Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy

  4. 09-Apr-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. WP/17428/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The Madras High Court set aside a tax assessment order dated 21.06.2025 against S.M. Network, finding the petitioner lacked reasonable opportunity to contest the tax demand after being unaware of proceedings. The court remanded the matter for reconsideration on condition that the petitioner pay 25% of disputed tax within 30 days, after which tax authorities must issue a fresh order within three months providing full opportunity to be heard, and any bank account attachment shall be released. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case