^®
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. |

RAM ENTERPRISES vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ST) ALLAVARAM ASSESSMENT CIRCLE CHENNAI. & OTHERS
(Madras High Court)

Hon'ble Judges:

N. ANAND VENKATESH

Pet. Counsel

S. Sathyanarayanan

Res. Counsel

V. Prashanthkiran

Petitioner / Applicant	RAM ENTERPRISES
Respondent	ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ST) ALLAVARAM ASSESSMENT CIRCLE CHENNAI. & OTHERS
Court	Madras High Court
State	Tamilnadu
Date	Sep 19, 2024
Order No.	W. P. No. 26784 of 2024 And WMP Nos. 29285 & 29286 of 2024
Citation	2024(9) TAXREPLY 11136
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 Considering the limited issue involved in this writ petition, the main writ petition itself is taken up for final hearing on consent given by either side. 2. This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned order passed by the respondent in GSTIN 33AAMFR9785P1Z1/2017-18 dated 20.12.2023. 3. The case of the petitioner is that they are registered under the GST law with GSTIN 33AAMFR9785PZ1. The petitioner is in the business of retail trading in Hardware goods. The further case of the petitioner is that proceedings were initiated by the respondent for mismatch between GSTR 3B with that of GSTR-1 for the year 2017-18. According to the petitioner, the order has been passed without affording any opportunity to the petitioner and that the petitioner is having sufficient materials to show that there was no mismatch and that the petitioner has correctly availed input tax credit and eligible for the entire amount of ITC claimed by them. It is under these circumstan....