P Ragukumar ATHIBAN VIJAY A.K, PRIYANGA D ,CHENDHAN T ,TAMIL MALAR T vs Deputy State Tax Officer-I, — WP/18924/2026

Case under Others Section 1. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED OF on 08th June 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: HCMA010914242026

e-Filing Number

13-04-2026

Filing Number

WP/67649/2026

Filing Date

15-Apr-2026

Registration No

WP/18924/2026

Registration Date

07-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

08-Jun-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISPOSED OF

Last updated 10-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Others Section 1

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.P Ragukumar ATHIBAN VIJAY A.K, PRIYANGA D ,CHENDHAN T ,TAMIL MALAR T

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Deputy State Tax Officer-I,

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 08-Jun-2026

    Honourable Mr Justice Senthilkumar RamamoorthyView PDF

    Case Summary: WP 18924/2026 The Madras High Court set aside a tax assessment order (dated 17.10.2025) issued by the Deputy State Tax Officer without providing the petitioner a hearing, finding procedural violation of natural justice. The court remanded the matter for fresh consideration on the condition that the petitioner remits 25% of the disputed tax demand within 30 days, after which the tax officer must issue a fresh order within three months following a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner to contest the demand. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 08-Jun-2026

    For Admission

    Honourable Mr Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy

  4. 15-Apr-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. WP/18924/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: WP 18924/2026 The Madras High Court set aside a tax assessment order (dated 17.10.2025) issued by the Deputy State Tax Officer without providing the petitioner a hearing, finding procedural violation of natural justice. The court remanded the matter for fresh consideration on the condition that the petitioner remits 25% of the disputed tax demand within 30 days, after which the tax officer must issue a fresh order within three months following a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner to contest the demand. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case