M/s.JS ENTERPRISES R.HEMALATHA, PRASHANTH N,DEVANAND J R,E.KEERTHAVARSHINI,A.RITHIKA,PRIYADHARSHINI,RAJU D,S.RUCKMANI DEVI,C.S.SREE NARAYANAN vs The State Tax Officer — WP/21465/2026

Case under Others Section 1. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED OF on 16th June 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: HCMA011203082026

e-Filing Number

20-05-2026

Filing Number

WP/87916/2026

Filing Date

20-May-2026

Registration No

WP/21465/2026

Registration Date

05-Jun-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

16-Jun-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISPOSED OF

Last updated 17-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Others Section 1

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.M/s.JS ENTERPRISES R.HEMALATHA, PRASHANTH N,DEVANAND J R,E.KEERTHAVARSHINI,A.RITHIKA,PRIYADHARSHINI,RAJU D,S.RUCKMANI DEVI,C.S.SREE NARAYANAN

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.The State Tax Officer

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 16-Jun-2026

    Honourable Mr Justice Senthilkumar RamamoorthyView PDF

    Case Summary: WP 21465/2026 The Madras High Court set aside a GST tax demand order dated 11.11.2025 issued by the State Tax Officer against JS Enterprises, finding it was passed without hearing the petitioner in violation of natural justice principles. The court remanded the matter for reconsideration, conditioning relief on the petitioner remitting 25% of the disputed tax demand within 30 days, after which the tax officer must issue a fresh order within three months following a fair hearing. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 16-Jun-2026

    For Admission

    Honourable Mr Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy

  4. 20-May-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. WP/21465/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: WP 21465/2026 The Madras High Court set aside a GST tax demand order dated 11.11.2025 issued by the State Tax Officer against JS Enterprises, finding it was passed without hearing the petitioner in violation of natural justice principles. The court remanded the matter for reconsideration, conditioning relief on the petitioner remitting 25% of the disputed tax demand within 30 days, after which the tax officer must issue a fresh order within three months following a fair 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