Aneesh Traders MADHUMITHA K, SANTHOSH KUMAR.K,B.SYED ABDUL WAKEEL,KIRUTHIKA.R vs The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer — WP/19023/2026

Case under Others Section 1. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED OF on 10th June 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: HCMA010892582026

e-Filing Number

09-04-2026

Filing Number

WP/66003/2026

Filing Date

09-Apr-2026

Registration No

WP/19023/2026

Registration Date

08-May-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

10-Jun-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISPOSED OF

Last updated 11-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Others Section 1

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Aneesh Traders MADHUMITHA K, SANTHOSH KUMAR.K,B.SYED ABDUL WAKEEL,KIRUTHIKA.R

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 10-Jun-2026

    Honourable Mr Justice Senthilkumar RamamoorthyView PDF

    The Madras High Court set aside a GST tax demand order (dated 30.04.2024) issued against Aneesh Traders for tax period 2018-2019, finding it was issued without providing the petitioner reasonable opportunity to contest the demand. The court remanded the matter for reconsideration on the condition that the petitioner remits 50% of the disputed tax within thirty days, after which the tax officer must issue a fresh order within three months following proper hearing. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 10-Jun-2026

    For Admission

    Honourable Mr Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy

  4. 09-Apr-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. WP/19023/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The Madras High Court set aside a GST tax demand order (dated 30.04.2024) issued against Aneesh Traders for tax period 2018-2019, finding it was issued without providing the petitioner reasonable opportunity to contest the demand. The court remanded the matter for reconsideration on the condition that the petitioner remits 50% of the disputed tax within thirty days, after which the tax officer must issue a fresh order within three months following proper hearing. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case