^®
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. |

SPACE 3 INTERIORS vs. STATE TAX OFFICER THRISSUR & OTHERS
(Kerala High Court)

Hon'ble Judges:

MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN

Pet. Counsel

Dheeraj Krishnan Perot

Vineetha A.a.

Res. Counsel

Resmitha R. Chandran

Petitioner / Applicant	SPACE 3 INTERIORS
Respondent	STATE TAX OFFICER THRISSUR & OTHERS
Court	Kerala High Court
State	Kerala
Date	Jun 21, 2024
Order No.	WP(C) NO. 22248 OF 2024
Citation	2024(6) TAXREPLY 9968
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
JUDGMENT The petitioner is an assessee under CGST/KSGST Rules, 2017. The petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging Ext. P3 order issued under Section 73 (9) of the CGST/KSGST Act, 2017 by the 1st respondent. The grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner has not received notice from the 1st respondent before passing an order under Section 73 (9) of the Act and there is violation of the principles of natural justice. According to the petitioner, the shop of the petitioner was closed in the year 2020 and since the show cause notices were issued in the address of the shop, the petitioner could not either respond to the notices or prefer an appeal. 2. In Ext. P3, it is stated that, show cause notice under Section 73 (1) was issued to the petitioner, but the petitioner did not reply or produced any documents against the proposal in the notice. 3. According to the petitioner, since the shop was closed and the notices were sent in the address of the shop, the ....