Am I right, your geotectonic conclusions as to syn-collisional and within-plate are only based on a granite suite that you interpreted as S-type? Are there any further criteria to substantiate such an assessment, e.g., the deformational history of the country rocks, the lithological-stratigraphic setting ?

HGD

This results is based on geochemistry and two different phases of microstructures observed. The data shows two variety. but ,can it be possible also with a single phase of granite or it need two or multiple phase deformation.

England and Wortel, 1980, comment inArticle Some consequences of the subduction of young slabs

'The transition corresponding to a resisting force of 8 × 1012 N/m divides regions displaying back-arc extensional tectonics from those displaying compressional tectonics. This is in good agreement with other estimates of the forces resisting slab motion'. There have been many investigations of this paradox since then.

Normally, extensional tectonic or rifting is not possible in a compressional regime. But, one possibility for granite intrusion is a strike-slip movement with simple shear. It can be done with the shape of granite bodies and joint structures related to granite bodies.

Please see: Back Arc Extension: Which Driving Mechanism? Mantovani et al. 2001, which may be another possibility.

Thank you Professors and senior Sirs for your valuable suggestions, I will try to find out the possible way for these two type of tectonic setting for this granite.

Please read, "Structural Control of Mesozoic Orogens on SE Asia Basin Opening

Benjamin Sautter and Manuel Pubellier, 2022.