^®
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. |

NAVBHARAT BOILERS vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER CHENNAI
(Madras High Court)

Hon'ble Judges:

SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY

Pet. Counsel

Raghav Rajeev Menon

Res. Counsel

T.n.c.kaushik

Petitioner / Applicant	NAVBHARAT BOILERS
Respondent	ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER CHENNAI
Court	Madras High Court
State	Tamilnadu
Date	Apr 23, 2024
Order No.	W. P. No. 10559 of 2024, W. M. P. Nos. 11589 & 11591 of 2024
Citation	2024(4) TAXREPLY 10831
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 dated 16.08.2023 is assailed on the ground of breach of principles of natural justice. 2. The petitioner is a registered person under applicable GST enactments. The petitioner asserts that the show cause notice and impugned order were uploaded on the “View Additional Notices and Orders” tab on the GST portal. It is further stated that the petitioner was unaware of proceedings because the notice and orders were not communicated to the petitioner through any other mode. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was not provided a reasonable opportunity to contest the tax demand on merits. He further submits that no personal hearing was provided although there is a reference there to in the impugned order. On instructions, he submits that the petitioner agrees to remit 10% of the disputed tax demand as a condition for remand. 4. Mr.T.N.C.Kaushik, learned Additional Government Pleader, accepts notice for the respondent. ....