^®
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. |

SPARK BIO GAS PRIVATE LIMITED vs. THE STATE TAX OFFICER (FAC) & OTHERS
(Madras High Court)

Hon'ble Judges:

SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY

Pet. Counsel

R. Sahana

Lakshmi Kumaran

Sridharan Attorneys

Res. Counsel

T.n.c. Kaushik

Petitioner / Applicant	SPARK BIO GAS PRIVATE LIMITED
Respondent	THE STATE TAX OFFICER (FAC) & OTHERS
Court	Madras High Court
State	Tamilnadu
Date	Jul 31, 2024
Order No.	W. P. No. 19801 of 2024 And W. M. P. Nos. 21685, 21687 & 21691 of 2024
Citation	2024(7) TAXREPLY 10405
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 dated 27.05.2024 is challenged on the ground of breach of principles of natural justice. 2. The petitioner is a wholly owned subsidiary of M/s. Mahasakthi Bio Enercon Private Limited ('MBE'), which specializes in production and bottling of bio-CNG. The holding company of the petitioner was awarded a concession by the Greater Chennai Corporation for the construction of six bio-gas plants. In relation thereto, an entity called CEID Consultants and Engineering Private Limited (CEID) had agreed to supply goods. Such goods were procured by CEID Engineering Private Limited from Power Hydrotech Private Limited (Power Hydrotech). The invoice was issued on “Bill To Ship To” basis by Power Hydrotech to CEID and the consignee (ship to party) was the petitioner. The goods were intercepted while being transported from Gujarat to Chennai. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner referred to the tax invoice and pointed out that the particulars of the pet....