^®
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. |

K. RAMAR vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF CGST & CENTRAL EXCISE AND THE SUPERINTENDENT, MADURAI
(Madras High Court)

Hon'ble Judges:

K.KUMARESH BABU

Pet. Counsel

R. Veeramanikandan

Res. Counsel

R. Gowrishankar

Petitioner / Applicant	K. RAMAR
Respondent	THE COMMISSIONER OF CGST & CENTRAL EXCISE AND THE SUPERINTENDENT, MADURAI
Court	Madras High Court
State	Tamilnadu
Date	Jan 21, 2025
Order No.	W. P. (MD) No. 1396 of 2025 W. P. (MD) No. 1396 of 2025
Citation	2025(1) TAXREPLY 12469
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 Heard Mr. R. Veeramanikandan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. R. Gowrishankar, learned Central Government Standing Counsel for the respondents. 2. The present Writ Petition is filed challenging an order of cancellation of the registration of the petitioner on the premise that the statutory returns have not been filed for a continuous period of six months. 3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that returns have been filed and the appropriate taxes have also been paid and the petitioner is ready to pay any further taxes that may be due along with late fee and interest, as required under the Goods and Services Tax Act. 4. At the outset, it is submitted by both the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Central Government Standing Counsel for the respondents that the issue stands covered by a series of judgments, commencing with the decision in Tvl. Suguna Cutpiece vs. Appellate Deputy Commissioner (ST) (GS....