^®
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. |

ILB RAMESH HOMES PRIVATE LIMITED vs. STATE TAX OFFICER, CHENNAI
(Madras High Court)

Hon'ble Judges:

SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY

Pet. Counsel

P. Rajkumar

Res. Counsel

T. N.c. Kaushik

Petitioner / Applicant	ILB RAMESH HOMES PRIVATE LIMITED
Respondent	STATE TAX OFFICER, CHENNAI
Court	Madras High Court
State	Tamilnadu
Date	Apr 25, 2024
Order No.	W. P. No. 10943 of 2024 and W. M. P. Nos. 12041 & 12044 of 2024
Citation	2024(4) TAXREPLY 10616
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 19.12.2023 is challenged on the ground that the petitioner did not have a reasonable opportunity to contest the tax demand on merits. 2. The petitioner is a developer. It asserts that Input Tax Credit (ITC) accrued from financial year 2017-2018 until April 2022 in an aggregate sum of Rs.11,46,060/-. Since the petitioner did not have any outward supplies, it is stated that the petitioner reversed the available ITC in May 2022. On account of not being aware of proceedings culminating in the impugned order, the petitioner asserts that it was unable to explain that ITC was reversed. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner referred to the petitioner's electronic credit ledger and the GSTR 3B return for the month of May in the year 2022-2023 to point out that the total ITC of Rs. 11,46,060/- was reversed on account of not being aware of proceedings. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner was unable to contest the tax demand on merits. On....