^®
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. |

NARENDRA HIRAWAT vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & OTHERS
(Bombay High Court)

Hon'ble Judges:

SONAK
JITENDRA JAIN

Pet. Counsel

Rahul Thakar

C.b. Thakar

Res. Counsel

Jyoti Chavan

Petitioner / Applicant	NARENDRA HIRAWAT
Respondent	THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & OTHERS
Court	Bombay High Court
State	Maharashtra
Date	Dec 16, 2024
Order No.	WRIT PETITION (L) NO. 28395 OF 2023
Citation	2024(12) TAXREPLY 11873
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
P.C.:- 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Rule. The Rule is made returnable immediately at the request of and with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. 3. The petitioner has instituted the appeal before the appellate authority against the order dated 25 April 2022. However, inadvertently, while filing the appeal online, as against the column indicating pre-deposit, no amount was indicated. 4. After this error was realized, the petitioner did make the 10% mandatory pre-deposit from the electronic cash ledger. However, by ignoring this compliance and holding the petitioner to the inadvertent error, the appellate authority has dismissed the petitioner’s appeal by order dated 13 April 2021. 5. Since the pre-deposit has been made, we agree with the learned counsel for the petitioner that such a rigid stand should not have been adopted. This was a case of an inadvertent error and the dismissal of the petitioner’s appeal even after t....