^®
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. |

SKYRAMS OUTDOOR ADVERTISINGS INDIA PVT. LTD. vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ST) , THE BRANCH MANAGER, CHENNAI
(Madras High Court)

Hon'ble Judges:

SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY

Pet. Counsel

P. Rajkumar

Res. Counsel

V. Prashanth Kiran

Petitioner / Applicant	SKYRAMS OUTDOOR ADVERTISINGS INDIA PVT. LTD.
Respondent	THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ST) , THE BRANCH MANAGER, CHENNAI
Court	Madras High Court
State	Tamilnadu
Date	Jul 1, 2024
Order No.	W. P. No. 16085 of 2024 And W. M. P. Nos. 17596 to 17598 of 2024
Citation	2024(7) TAXREPLY 10088
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 30.12.2023 is assailed on the ground that the petitioner did not have a reasonable opportunity to contest the tax demand on merits. Pursuant to show cause notice dated 29.09.2023, the impugned order was issued on 30.12.2023. The petitioner asserts that it was unaware of proceedings culminating in the impugned assessment order because all communications were uploaded on the GST portal and not communicated to the petitioner through any other mode. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner became aware of these proceedings upon receipt of bank attachment notice dated 15.04.2024. He further submits that the impugned order contains no reasons and that a personal hearing was not offered. On instructions, he submits that the petitioner agrees to remit 10% of the disputed tax demand as a condition for remand. 3. Mr.V.Prashanth Kiran, learned Government Advocate, accepts notice for the 1st respondent. He submits that princi....