^®
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. |

GEM EQUIPMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ST) TAMILNADU
(Madras High Court)

Hon'ble Judges:

SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY

Pet. Counsel

Aparna Nandakumar

Res. Counsel

C. Harsha Raj

Petitioner / Applicant	GEM EQUIPMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED
Respondent	THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ST) TAMILNADU
Court	Madras High Court
State	Tamilnadu
Date	Jun 12, 2024
Order No.	W. P. No. 14919 of 2024 and W. M. P. Nos. 16186 & 16189 of 2024
Citation	2024(6) TAXREPLY 11307
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 An order in original dated 27.12.2023 is assailed on the ground of breach of principles of natural justice. 2. By asserting that the impugned order and notices preceding such order were uploaded on the “View Additional Notices and Orders” tab on the GST portal and not communicated to the petitioner through any other mode, the present writ petition was filed. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the confirmed tax proposals pertain to a mismatch between the petitioner's GSTR 3B returns and the auto-populated GSTR 2A as also between the petitioner's GSTR 1 statement and GSTR 3B returns. As regards each issue dealt with in the impugned order, learned counsel submits that the petitioner would be in a position to satisfactorily explain the mismatch if provided an opportunity. On instructions, she submits that the petitioner would remit 10% of the disputed tax demand as a condition for remand. 4. Mr. C.Harsha Raj, learned Additional G....