The Madras High Court has granted an interim stay in a GST dispute where a company alleged that the tax authorities raised a demand based on its pan-India transactions without considering the GST already paid separately in the respective States.

The bench of Justice Krishnan Ramasamy found the company’s submissions prima facie sufficient to grant interim protection and listed the matter for November 5, 2026, for the respondents to file their counter.

BUY NOW: E-Magazine: 1000+ Landmark GST Judgments (2017–2026)

The petitioner/assessee approached the High Court challenging the tax authorities’ action concerning the levy of GST dues. The proceedings involve the State of Tamil Nadu, officers of the Chengalpattu Intelligence Division, and the Assistant Commissioner of the Thiruvanmiyur Assessment Circle.

Appearing for the company, advocate Vipin Upadhyay submitted that it conducts business across the country and separately remits GST and other tax dues in each State.

According to the company, the authorities failed to consider these State-wise payments while passing the impugned order. Its grievance was that GST dues had instead been levied on the basis of its pan-India transactions.

The company contended that this approach reflected a complete non-application of mind and sought an interim stay.

The central issue raised in the petitions is whether the disputed GST demand properly accounts for the company’s transactions and tax payments in the respective States, rather than proceeding on the basis of its nationwide transactions.

The company’s challenge concerns the basis on which the authorities computed the demand. It maintained that its separate discharge of tax liabilities across States was relevant to the assessment and had been overlooked.

However, the brief interim order does not identify the tax periods involved, the amount demanded, or the detailed computation adopted by the authorities. It also does not record a final finding that the demand resulted in duplicate taxation.

Additional Government Pleader Amirta Poonkodi Dinakaran accepted notice on behalf of the respondents and sought time to file a counter.

After considering the company’s submissions, Justice Ramasamy recorded that the court was prima facie satisfied and inclined to grant an interim stay. The court accordingly ordered interim protection and directed that the matter be posted on November 5, 2026, for filing the counter.

The order therefore provides relief to the company while the challenge remains pending and the respondents place their response before the court.

Membership Required to Access Case Details & Order Copy

To view the complete Case Details and Download Order Copy, you must have an active membership. Please subscribe to continue.

Read More: Missing E-Way Bill Alone Can’t Justify GST Demand Without Evasion Intent Under Pre-2022 Law: GSTAT