^®
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.S. GRANITE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ST) , THE MANAGER, BANK OF INDIA
(Madras High Court)

Hon'ble Judges:

KRISHNAN RAMASAMY

Pet. Counsel

S. Sanskar Samdaria

Res. Counsel

V. Prashanth Kiran

Petitioner / Applicant	K.S. GRANITE
Respondent	THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ST) , THE MANAGER, BANK OF INDIA
Court	Madras High Court
State	Tamilnadu
Date	Aug 7, 2024
Order No.	W. P. No. 21451 of 2024 And W. M. P. Nos. 23414 & 23415 of 2024
Citation	2024(8) TAXREPLY 10674
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.S.Sanskar Samdaria, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.V.Prashanth Kiran, learned Government Advocate (Tax) who takes notice on behalf of the first respondent. Considering the nature of relief to be granted herein, notice to the second respondent is dispensed with. With consent, the main Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission itself. 2. The challenge in this Writ Petition is to the order dated 31.10.2023 passed by the first respondent and the consequential demand order dated 01.11.2023 and to quash the same. 3. The facts of the case, in short, are as follows:- i) The petitioner is a Partnership Firm, running a business in the name and style, Tvl. K.S.Granite for several years; that during the Financial Year 2017-18, the petitioner claimed an Input Tax Credit, which was scrutinized by the first respondent by virtue of Section 61 of General Sales Tax Act read with Rule 89 of GST Rules and issued ....