^®
TaxReply India Private Limited

GST Library

Best GST Library

Subscription Plans

TaxGPT

GST News | Updates

GST Calendar

GST Case Laws

GST Case Laws Sitemap

GST Notifications, Circulars, Releases etc.

Act & Rules

Act & Rules (Multi-view)

GST Rates

HSN Codes ^New

GST Forms

GST Diary

GST Notebook

GST Fees Manager

GST Council Meetings

GST Set-off Calculator

ITC Reversal Calculator

E-invoice Calculator

Inverted Duty Calculator

GSTR-3B Manual

GSTR-9 Manual

GSTR-9C Manual

Full Site Search

E-way Bill

Finance Bill

GST e-books

TaxReply Support

YouTube Videos

Twitter

Buy Premium Tax Domains

About Us

Our Services

🔒

TaxReply India Pvt Ltd

🔒

^®

Subscribe Free GST updates on...

Subscribe to Best GST Library of India and get ahead of the rest. Click here for plans. | GST Act & Rules e-book Click here. |

DEEPA TRADERS vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (ST) , THE STATE TAX OFFICER, CHENNAI
(Madras High Court)

Hon'ble Judges:

KRISHNAN RAMASAMY

Pet. Counsel

P.suresh Babu

Res. Counsel

G.nanmaran

Petitioner / Applicant	DEEPA TRADERS
Respondent	THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (ST) , THE STATE TAX OFFICER, CHENNAI
Court	Madras High Court
State	Tamilnadu
Date	Aug 13, 2024
Order No.	WP No. 19337 of 2024 and WMP Nos. 21193 and 21194 of 2024
Citation	2024(8) TAXREPLY 11027
Add to Favorites	Add to favorites.
Download Original Order
Print (Full Page)
Print (Judgement Only)

TaxGPT ^Beta

Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

Listen this case in simple words

Audio Timeline

Audio Speed:

AA |

ORDER
ORDER This writ petition challenges the impugned order of demand passed by the second respondent dated 01.02.2023 and the order of the first respondent dated 22.03.2024 rejecting the appeal filed by the petitioner against the order of demand. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner firm runs a wholesale business of selling of painting and he has been regular in filing the monthly returns. However, due to ambiguity in the procedure adopted after the GST enactment, he failed to note the show cause notice dated 19.12.2022 issued by the second respondent showing discrepancies in GSTR returns. Subsequent thereto, the impugned demand order came to be issued on 01.02.2023 by the second respondent. The petitioner came to know of the demand order only after the respondents initiated coercive steps to recover the demand amount and immediately thereafter, the petitioner filed an appeal before the first respondent, however, with a delay of 26....