^®
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. |

REVATHI READYMADES vs. THE DEPUTY STATE TAX OFFICER CHENNAI
(Madras High Court)

Hon'ble Judges:

SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY

Pet. Counsel

P.rajkumar

Res. Counsel

V.prashanth Kiran

Petitioner / Applicant	REVATHI READYMADES
Respondent	THE DEPUTY STATE TAX OFFICER CHENNAI
Court	Madras High Court
State	Tamilnadu
Date	Apr 23, 2024
Order No.	W. P. No. 10645 of 2024, W. M. P. Nos. 11713 & 11714 of 2024
Citation	2024(4) TAXREPLY 10827
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 28.04.2023 is challenged on the ground that the petitioner did not have a reasonable opportunity to contest the tax demand on merits. 2. The petitioner asserts that the show cause notice and impugned order were uploaded on the GST portal, but not communicated to the petitioner through any other mode. Consequently, it is stated that the petitioner was unaware of these proceedings until he was informed by the respondents about alleged arrears relating to assessment year 2018-19. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the confirmed tax proposal pertains to mismatch between the petitioner's GSTR 3B returns and the auto populated GSTR 2A. If provided an opportunity, he submits that the petitioner would be in a position to explain the reasons for the discrepancy. On instructions, he submits that the petitioner agrees to remit 10% of the disputed tax demand on condition for remand. 4. Mr.V.Prashanth Kiran, learned Government ....