^®
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. |

SOLE MATES INC vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, THE BRANCH MANAGER, CHENNAI
(Madras High Court)

Hon'ble Judges:

SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY

Pet. Counsel

V.vijayalakshmi

Res. Counsel

V.prasanth Kiran

Petitioner / Applicant	SOLE MATES INC
Respondent	THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, THE BRANCH MANAGER, CHENNAI
Court	Madras High Court
State	Tamilnadu
Date	Jun 19, 2024
Order No.	W. P. No. 14953 of 2024 and W. M. P. Nos. 16229, 16232 & 16235 of 2024
Citation	2024(6) TAXREPLY 11312
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 12.12.2023 is assailed on the ground of breach of principles of natural justice. By asserting that GST compliances had been entrusted to a consultant and that such consultant did not inform the petitioner about proceedings culminating in the impugned order, the present writ petition was filed. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the tax proposal related to a mismatch between the petitioner's GSTR 3B returns and the auto populated GSTR 2A. On account of being unaware of proceedings, the petitioner could not participate. Pursuant to the order impugned herein, she points out that a sum of Rs. 4,09,604.87/- was appropriated from the petitioner's bank account on 21.05.2024. 3. Mr. V.Prasanth Kiran, learned Government Advocate, accepts notice for the respondent. He points out that principles of natural justice were complied with by issuing show cause notice dated 20.09.2023 and by offering a personal hearing by notices da....