^®
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. |

SREE MANOJ INTERNATIONAL vs. THE DEPUTY STATE TAX OFFICER TIRUPPUR
(Madras High Court)

Hon'ble Judges:

SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY

Pet. Counsel

P.rajkumar

Res. Counsel

V.prashanth Kiran

Petitioner / Applicant	SREE MANOJ INTERNATIONAL
Respondent	THE DEPUTY STATE TAX OFFICER TIRUPPUR
Court	Madras High Court
State	Tamilnadu
Date	Apr 25, 2024
Order No.	W. P. No. 10977 of 2024, W. M. P. Nos. 12061 & 12062 of 2024
Citation	2024(4) TAXREPLY 10841
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 01.03.2024 is assailed on the ground of breach of principles of natural justice. 2. The petitioner states that he was unaware of proceedings until recently since the notices and order were uploaded in the GST portal and not communicated to the petitioner through any other mode. The present writ petition was filed in the said facts and circumstances. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the confirmed tax proposal pertains to the alleged discrepancy between the petitioner's GSTR 3B returns and the auto-populated GSTR 2A. In relation thereto, he submits that the IGST paid in relation to imports is reflected in the GSTR 2A, but that the same was not taken into consideration. If provided an opportunity, he submits that the petitioner would be in a position to explain the discrepancy to the satisfaction of the respondent. On instructions, he submits that the petitioner agrees to remit 10% of the disputed tax demand as a condit....