^®
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. |

KASTURI & SONS PVT. LTD. vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF GST & CENTRAL EXCISE (APPEALS-1) , CHENNAI
(Madras High Court)

Hon'ble Judges:

SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY

Pet. Counsel

T. R. Ramesh

Res. Counsel

Rajnish Pathiyil

Petitioner / Applicant	KASTURI & SONS PVT. LTD.
Respondent	ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF GST & CENTRAL EXCISE (APPEALS-1) , CHENNAI
Court	Madras High Court
State	Tamilnadu
Date	Jul 10, 2024
Order No.	W. P. No. 18642 of 2024 And W. M. P. No. 20450 of 2024
Citation	2024(7) TAXREPLY 10352
Add to Favorites	Add to favorites.
Download Original Order
Print (Full Page)
Print (Judgement Only)

Related Tags :

☍

Rule 108

TaxGPT ^Beta

Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

Listen this case in simple words

Audio Timeline

Audio Speed:

AA |

ORDER
ORDER In this writ petition, an appellate order dated 13.03.2024 is assailed. The petitioner had applied for refund under Section 54 of applicable GST enactments. Such application was rejected by order dated 30.08.2022. The petitioner carried the matter in appeal before the appellate authority by presenting such appeal online on 31.10.2022. The time limit for filing such appeal was up to 28.11.2022. On account of the hard copy of the appeal being submitted on 02.08.2023, the appeal was rejected. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner referred to the facts set out above and submitted that interference with the impugned order is warranted in as much as the appeals were filed within time. 3. Mr.Rajnish Pathiyil, learned senior standing counsel, accepts notice for the respondent. He submits that the date of issuance of provisional acknowledgment shall be considered as the date of filing of the appeal only if the order appealed against was uploaded on the common portal. 4.....