Tvl Ksr and Company v. The State Tax Officer,Inspection -1,

ORDER Mr.T.N.C.Kaushik, learned Additional Government Pleader, takes notice for R1 and R2.

¶2In this Writ Petition, the petitioner has challenged the impugned Order dated 14.07.2023 passed by the 1st respondent for the tax period 2020-2021.

¶3The challenge has been made on the ground that the impugned order was passed by the Deputy Commissioner (ST) (Inspection), who was incompetent to pass such an order.

¶4It is submitted that as per Circular No.23/2021 dated 04.10.2021, the order should have been passed by the State Tax Officer (Inspection).

¶5In this connection, a reference is made to Paragraph 5.2 of the aforesaid circular, which reads as under: "5.2. On receipt of the inspection report from the inspecting officers, the Joint Commissioner should examine the same with the defects noticed in the IF approved. They have to see whether all the issues to be examined as contained in the IF, have been examined and discussed in the said inspection report and on satisfying the same, the inspection report could be approved by them. If any point/s as contained in the IF has/have been omitted to be discussed in the inspection report then the inspection officers concerned should be directed to examine the omitted point/s of the IF and resubmit the inspection report to the Joint Commissioner."

¶6Having considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondents, I am not inclined to admit this writ petition, as the writ petition is barred by limitation.

¶7The Hon'ble Supreme Court, in Asstt. Commr. (CT), LTU, Kakinada Vs Glaxo Smith Kline Consumer Health Care Ltd., [C.A.No.2413 of 2020, dated 06.05.2020], has categorically held that a writ petition cannot be entertained when the statutory remedy of appeal has become time-barred.

¶8As such, this writ petition is liable to be dismissed and accordingly, it is dismissed. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. No costs.

17.02.2026 raja To

¶1The State Tax Officer, Inspection – 1, Office of the Deputy Commissioner (ST) [Inspection], Villupuram Camp, Vellore.

¶2The State Tax Officer, Tindivanam Assessment Circle, No.136 & 137 SBI Buildings, Nehru Street, Tindivanam.

¶3The Branch Manager Tamil Nadu Mercantile Bank, No.28, Rajaji Salai,

¶4The Branch Manager, State Bank of India, 137, J.N Street,

C.SARAVANAN, J. raja

17.02.2026 (1/2)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 17.02.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN and W.M.P.No.6689 & 6691 of 2026 Tvl. KSR and Company Represented by Partner Mr.S.Raghuram, No.1016, Mettu Street, Thenkodipakkam Vanur Taluk, Tindivanam – 604102. ... Petitioner Vs. 1. The State Tax Officer, Inspection – 1, Office of the Deputy Commissioner (ST) [Inspection], Villupuram Camp, Vellore. 2. The State Tax Officer, Tindivanam Assessment Circle, No.136 & 137 SBI Buildings, Nehru Street, Tindivanam. 3. The Branch Manager Tamil Nadu Mercantile Bank, No.28, Rajaji Salai, 4. The Branch Manager, State Bank of India, 137, J.N Street, ... Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records on the files of the 1st Respondent in proceedings in GSTIN: 33AAHFK5367K1Z1/2020-21 dated 14.07.2023 and quash the same as illegal, invalid, without authority of law, and in violation of the principles of proper natural in the justice. For Petitioner : Mr.D.Vijayakumar For R1 & R2 : Mr.T.N.C.Kaushik Additional Government Pleader