^®
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. |

SHABBIR SANITARY STORES vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ST) (FAC) CHENNAI
(Madras High Court)

Hon'ble Judges:

SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY

Pet. Counsel

C.rekha Kumari

Res. Counsel

C.harsha Raj

Petitioner / Applicant	SHABBIR SANITARY STORES
Respondent	THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ST) (FAC) CHENNAI
Court	Madras High Court
State	Tamilnadu
Date	Jun 27, 2024
Order No.	W. P. No. 15918 of 2024 and W. M. P. Nos. 17378 & 17379 of 2024
Citation	2024(6) TAXREPLY 11321
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 26.12.2023 is assailed in this writ petition on the ground that the petitioner did not have a reasonable opportunity to contest the tax demand on merits. The petitioner asserts that it was not possible to participate in proceedings because the petitioner was unaware of proceedings on account of the show cause notice and other communications being uploaded on the “view additional notices and orders” tab of the GST portal and not communicated to the petitioner through any other mode. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the tax proposal arose out of an inadvertent error while filing GSTR 3B returns. She submits that the petitioner filled up the column relating to inward supplies liable to reverse charge instead of the column relating to other ITC. On instructions, she submits that the petitioner agrees to remit 10% of the disputed tax demand as a condition for remand. 3. Mr. C.Harsha Raj, learned Additional Governm....