[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Madras High Court
M.Palanikumar vs The Deputy Commissioner (Appeal) on 20 February, 2026
Author: Krishnan Ramasamy
Bench: Krishnan Ramasamy
W.P.(MD) Nos.4761 to 4763 of 2026
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENGH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 20.02.2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY
W.P.(MD)Nos.4761, 4762 and 4763 of 2026
and
W.M.P.(MD).Nos.3978, 3980, 3981, 3982, 3983, 3985, 3988, 3989 and
3991 of 2026
W.P.(MD).No.4761 of 2026
M.Palanikumar ... Petitioner
Vs
1.The Deputy Commissioner (Appeal),
TNGST,
Commercial Tax Complex,
Dr.Thangaraj Salai,
Madurai.
2.The Assistant Commissioner (ST), FAC,
Thirupparankudram Circle,
Dr.Thangaraj Salai,
Commercial Taxes Complexes,
Third Floor,
Madurai-625 020.
3.The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer,
Thirupparankundram,
Madurai West,
Madurai. ... Respondents
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/02/2026 09:28:11 pm )
W.P.(MD) Nos.4761 to 4763 of 2026
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the
records of the impugned order passed by the third respondent in
Reference No.ZD330126206719H dated 30.01.2026 and quash the same
and consequently directing the respondents to drop all further
proceedings initiated on the basis of the impugned order passed by the
third respondent in Reference No.ZD330126206719H dated 30.01.2026.
For Petitioner : Mr.R.Aravindan
For Respondents : Mr.R.Suresh Kumar,
Additional Government Pleader
W.P.(MD).No.4762 of 2026
M.Palanikumar ... Petitioner
Vs
1.The Deputy Commissioner (Appeal),
TNGST,
Commercial Tax Complex,
Dr.Thangaraj Salai,
Madurai.
2.The Assistant Commissioner (ST), FAC,
Thirupparankudram Circle,
Dr.Thangaraj Salai,
Commercial Taxes Complexes,
Third Floor,
Madurai-625 020.
3.The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer,
Thirupparankundram,
Madurai West,
Madurai. ... Respondents
2/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/02/2026 09:28:11 pm )
W.P.(MD) Nos.4761 to 4763 of 2026
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the
records of the impugned order passed by the third respondent in
Reference No.ZD330126206864K dated 30.01.2026 and quash the same
and consequently directing the respondents to drop all further
proceedings initiated on the basis of the impugned order passed by the
third respondent in Reference No.ZD330126206864K dated 30.01.2026.
For Petitioner : Mr.R.Aravindan
For Respondents : Mr.R.Suresh Kumar,
Additional Government Pleader
W.P.(MD).No.4763 of 2026
M.Palanikumar ... Petitioner
Vs
1.The Deputy Commissioner (Appeal),
TNGST,
Commercial Tax Complex,
Dr.Thangaraj Salai,
Madurai.
2.The Assistant Commissioner (ST), FAC,
Thirupparankudram Circle,
Dr.Thangaraj Salai,
Commercial Taxes Complexes,
Third Floor,
Madurai-625 020.
3.The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer,
Thirupparankundram,
Madurai West,
Madurai. ... Respondents
3/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/02/2026 09:28:11 pm )
W.P.(MD) Nos.4761 to 4763 of 2026
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the
records of the impugned order passed by the third respondent in
Reference No.ZD330126206927G dated 30.01.2026 and quash the same
and consequently directing the respondents to drop all further
proceedings initiated on the basis of the impugned order passed by the
third respondent in Reference No.ZD330126206927G dated 30.01.2026.
For Petitioner : Mr.R.Aravindan
For Respondents : Mr.R.Suresh Kumar,
Additional Government Pleader
COMMON ORDER
These Writ Petitions have been filed challenging the impugned
orders passed by the third respondent dated 30.01.2026.
2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit
that the impugned orders relate to the assessment years 2020–21, 2021–
22 and 2022–23. It is submitted that the petitioner’s GST registration had
already been cancelled with effect from 01.09.2019 and thereafter the
petitioner had not carried on any business. Therefore, according to the
petitioner, the levy made for the subsequent years is unsustainable. It is
further submitted that since the proceedings were uploaded in the portal
and the petitioner was not actively carrying on business, he was not
aware of the same. Hence, without proper application of mind and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/02/2026 09:28:11 pm )
W.P.(MD) Nos.4761 to 4763 of 2026
without affording effective opportunity, the impugned orders came to be
passed.
3. The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the
respondents would submit that there are sufficient materials to show that
the petitioner had carried on business activities during the relevant
period and that the levy pertains to seigniorage fee and royalty.
Therefore, the impugned orders were passed based on available records.
4. This Court has considered the submissions made on either side.
5. The issue involved in these writ petitions relates to the levy of
seigniorage fee and royalty for the assessment years 2020–21, 2021–22
and 2022–23. It is also brought to the notice of this Court that the larger
issue with regard to such levy is pending consideration before the
Hon’ble Apex Court.
5. Insofar as the present case is concerned, though the petitioner
contends that his registration stood cancelled with effect from
01.09.2019, the fact remains that the impugned orders have been passed
on the basis of certain materials available with the Department. In the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/02/2026 09:28:11 pm )
W.P.(MD) Nos.4761 to 4763 of 2026
interest of justice, this Court is inclined to grant one more opportunity to
the petitioner to put forth his objections on merits.
6. Accordingly, the impugned orders dated 30.01.2026 passed by
the third respondent are set aside, subject to the condition that the
petitioner shall remit 10% of the disputed tax amount in respect of each
assessment year within a period of three (3) weeks from the date of
receipt of a copy of this order.
7. Upon such payment, the matter shall stand remitted to the third
respondent. The petitioner shall file his detailed reply/objections within a
period of three (3) weeks thereafter. The third respondent shall afford an
opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner and pass fresh orders on
merits and in accordance with law, taking into consideration the
pendency of the issue before the Hon’ble Apex Court.
8. With the above observations, these Writ Petitions stand disposed
of. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are
closed.
20.02.2026
TSG
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Index : Yes / No
Neutral Citation : Yes / No
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/02/2026 09:28:11 pm )
W.P.(MD) Nos.4761 to 4763 of 2026
To
1.The Deputy Commissioner (Appeal),
TNGST,
Commercial Tax Complex,
Dr.Thangaraj Salai,
Madurai.
2.The Assistant Commissioner (ST), FAC,
Thirupparankudram Circle,
Dr.Thangaraj Salai,
Commercial Taxes Complexes,
Third Floor,
Madurai-625 020.
3.The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer,
Thirupparankundram,
Madurai West,
Madurai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/02/2026 09:28:11 pm )
W.P.(MD) Nos.4761 to 4763 of 2026
KRISHNAN RAMASAMY, J.
TSG
W.P.(MD)Nos.4761 to 4763 of 2026
20.02.2026
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/02/2026 09:28:11 pm )
