^®
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. |

GRK PLASTIC vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ST) (FAC) CHENNAI
(Madras High Court)

Hon'ble Judges:

SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY

Pet. Counsel

L.gokulraj

Hari Radhakrishnan

Res. Counsel

C.harsha Raj

Petitioner / Applicant	GRK PLASTIC
Respondent	THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ST) (FAC) CHENNAI
Court	Madras High Court
State	Tamilnadu
Date	Jul 11, 2024
Order No.	W. P. Nos. 16856 & 16858 of 2024 and W. M. P. Nos. 18538, 18540 & 18543 of 2024
Citation	2024(7) TAXREPLY 11238
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
COMMON ORDER An order in original dated 29.12.2023 is assailed on the ground that the petitioner's replies were not duly taken into consideration. 2. The petitioner had filed the GSTR 3B return for the month of October in the assessment period 2017-18. In such return, the petitioner states that an inadvertent error was committed by reflecting net ITC, as regards Central Tax, as Rs. 6,55,561/- instead of Rs. 65,561/-. Upon realizing the mistake, it is stated that the petitioner contacted the GST authorities and was informed that the error may be rectified by adding an amount representing the excess ITC shown in the earlier return in the Central Tax toward outward supplies in the GSTR 3B return for the following month. The petitioner states that this course of action was adopted. In spite of submitting replies to the intimation and show cause notice and explaining the aforesaid, it is stated that the tax proposal was confirmed. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner inv....