^®
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. |

RENAATUS PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED vs. STATE TAX OFFICER, CHENNAI AND OTHERS
(Madras High Court)

Hon'ble Judges:

SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY

Pet. Counsel

G. Shiva Kumar

Res. Counsel

C. Harsha Raj

Petitioner / Applicant	RENAATUS PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED
Respondent	STATE TAX OFFICER, CHENNAI AND OTHERS
Court	Madras High Court
State	Tamilnadu
Date	Apr 23, 2024
Order No.	W . P. N o. 10698 of 2024 & WMP Nos. 11784 & 11786 of 2024
Citation	2024(4) TAXREPLY 10613
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 23.12.2023 is assailed both on the ground of breach of principles of natural justice and on the ground that there are errors apparent on the face of record. 2. The petitioner is a company engaged in undertaking works contracts and turnkey projects, including Government projects, in Tamil Nadu, Puducherry and Mauritious. In Financial Year 2017-18, the total turnover of the petitioner was about Rs.200 crore. Proceedings were initiated against the petitioner by issuing show cause notice dated 27.09.2023. Such proceedings culminated in the impugned order dated 23.12.2023. The petitioner asserts that it was unable to respond to the show cause notice or participate in proceedings on account of not being aware of such proceedings. The present writ petition was filed in the above facts and circumstances after filing a rectification petition dated 14.03.2024. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order travelled beyond th....