M/s. Arunkumar Associates SRI HARINI S P, ,K.M.Kalicharan,L.Gokulraj,R.Priyanka,Chandrika B,S.Elang Suriyan vs The Deputy State Tax Officer 1 — WP/17435/2026

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

Case disposed

CNR: HCMA010899002026

e-Filing Number

12-04-2026

Filing Number

WP/66481/2026

Filing Date

15-Apr-2026

Registration No

WP/17435/2026

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.M/s. Arunkumar Associates SRI HARINI S P, ,K.M.Kalicharan,L.Gokulraj,R.Priyanka,Chandrika B,S.Elang Suriyan

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.The Deputy State Tax Officer 1

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 02-Jun-2026

    Honourable Mr Justice Senthilkumar RamamoorthyView PDF

    Case Summary: WP 17435/2026 M/s. Arunkumar Associates challenged a GST assessment order dated 18.11.2025 by the Deputy State Tax Officer, Namakkal, alleging breach of natural justice principles. The Madras High Court set aside the impugned order and remanded it for reconsideration, conditional upon the petitioner remitting 25% of the disputed tax demand within 30 days. The tax authority must provide reasonable opportunity to the petitioner and issue a fresh order within three months of payment. 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. 15-Apr-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. WP/17435/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: WP 17435/2026 M/s. Arunkumar Associates challenged a GST assessment order dated 18.11.2025 by the Deputy State Tax Officer, Namakkal, alleging breach of natural justice principles. The Madras High Court set aside the impugned order and remanded it for reconsideration, conditional upon the petitioner remitting 25% of the disputed tax demand within 30 days. The tax authority must provide reasonable opportunity to the petitioner and issue a fresh order within three months of payment. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case