SARVAH INFRA PRIVATE LIMITED, G NATARAJAN, J.RAGINI,N.ASMITHA,K.RAMYA,S.SRIDEVI vs THE STATE TAX OFFICER (FAC) (INTELLIGENCE), — WP/19087/2026

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

Case disposed

CNR: HCMA010969412026

e-Filing Number

16-04-2026

Filing Number

WP/71804/2026

Filing Date

16-Apr-2026

Registration No

WP/19087/2026

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

08-Jun-2026

Nature of Disposal

--DISPOSED OF

Last updated 10-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Others Section 1

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SARVAH INFRA PRIVATE LIMITED, G NATARAJAN, J.RAGINI,N.ASMITHA,K.RAMYA,S.SRIDEVI

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE TAX OFFICER (FAC) (INTELLIGENCE),

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 08-Jun-2026

    Honourable Mr Justice Senthilkumar RamamoorthyView PDF

    CASE SUMMARY: WP 19087/2026 The Madras High Court set aside a GST order dated 29.09.2025 issued by the State Tax Officer against Sarvah Infra Private Limited, finding alleged breach of natural justice principles. The court remanded the matter for reconsideration on the condition that the petitioner remit 25% of the disputed tax demand within 30 days, after which the tax authority must issue a fresh order within three months, providing the petitioner reasonable opportunity to be heard. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 16-Apr-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. WP/19087/2026

casestatus.in Summary

CASE SUMMARY: WP 19087/2026 The Madras High Court set aside a GST order dated 29.09.2025 issued by the State Tax Officer against Sarvah Infra Private Limited, finding alleged breach of natural justice principles. The court remanded the matter for reconsideration on the condition that the petitioner remit 25% of the disputed tax demand within 30 days, after which the tax authority must issue a fresh order within three months, providing the petitioner reasonable opportunity to be heard. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case