^®
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. |

SMA TEX vs. THE PROPER OFFICER/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ST) (FAC)
(Madras High Court)

Hon'ble Judges:

SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY

Pet. Counsel

C. Prabakaran

Res. Counsel

T.n.c. Kaushik

Petitioner / Applicant	SMA TEX
Respondent	THE PROPER OFFICER/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ST) (FAC)
Court	Madras High Court
State	Tamilnadu
Date	Jul 1, 2024
Order No.	W. P. No. 16048 of 2024 And W. M. P. Nos. 17551 & 17553 of 2024
Citation	2024(7) TAXREPLY 10089
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 In this writ petition, an order dated 03.03.2023 and the consequential distraint order dated 16.05.2024 are assailed. The petitioner asserts that a notice for cancellation of the GST registration was received on 21.01.2019 and that such registration was cancelled on 27.02.2019. On account of cancellation of the GST registration, the petitioner asserts that he was unaware of proceedings culminating in the impugned assessment order under Section 62 until distraint proceedings were initiated. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had suffered business losses and that the registration was cancelled under those circumstances. In those circumstances, he submits that the petitioner was unable to participate in proceedings culminating in the impugned order. He also submits that the petitioner agrees to remit 10% of the disputed tax demand under the impugned assessment order as a condition for remand. 3. Mr.T.N.C.Kaushik, learned Additional Gover....