^®
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. |

OGADRAM vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ST) , CHENNAI
(Madras High Court)

Hon'ble Judges:

SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY

Pet. Counsel

R.swarnavel

Res. Counsel

T.n.c. Kaushik

Petitioner / Applicant	OGADRAM
Respondent	ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ST) , CHENNAI
Court	Madras High Court
State	Tamilnadu
Date	Jun 19, 2024
Order No.	Writ Petition No. 15138 of 2024 And W. M. P. Nos. 16465 & 16466 of 2024
Citation	2024(6) TAXREPLY 9983
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 in original dated 18.08.2023 is assailed on the ground of breach of principles of natural justice. 2. The petitioner is engaged in selling electrical and plumbing hardware. He had opted for the composition scheme and filed annual returns in Form GSTR 4 and quarterly returns in Form CMP-08. Upon receipt of a notice dated 15.07.2022 by registered post on 19.07.2022, the petitioner replied on 29.07.2022. Since the show cause notice dated 28.11.2022 was uploaded on the portal but not communicated to the petitioner through any other mode, the petitioner states that he was unaware of such show cause notice and did not reply to the same. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner referred to the reply dated 29.07.2022 and pointed out that the petitioner had stated that the turnover reported by him in Form CMP-08 was Rs. 6,37,595/-. Learned counsel contends that this reply was not taken into consideration in the impugned order. He also submits that the petitioner could....