^®
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. |

SRI MURUGAN TRADERS vs. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, TAMILNADU.
(Madras High Court)

Hon'ble Judges:

KRISHNAN RAMASAMY

Pet. Counsel

Joseph Prabakar

Res. Counsel

G.nanmaran

Petitioner / Applicant	SRI MURUGAN TRADERS
Respondent	THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, TAMILNADU.
Court	Madras High Court
State	Tamilnadu
Date	Aug 13, 2024
Order No.	W. P. No. 22314 of 2024 And W. M. P Nos. 24293 and 24296 of 2024
Citation	2024(8) TAXREPLY 10679
Add to Favorites	Add to favorites.
Download Original Order
Print (Full Page)
Print (Judgement Only)

Related Tags :

☍

Section 75

TaxGPT ^Beta

Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

Listen this case in simple words

Audio Timeline

Audio Speed:

AA |

ORDER
ORDER The present Writ Petition is filed for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records in Summary Order in Form GST DRC-07, dated 23.04.2024 in Ref.No.ZD330424177038F passed by the respondent and quash the orders as arbitrary and illegal. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a dealer in SIM Cards for BSNL and the respondent issued Form GST DRC- 01 dated 28.12.2023 for the year 2018-19 in which the respondent raised two issues. The petitioner filed a detailed reply dated 10.04.2024 to the show cause notice and the same was uploaded in the portal on 12.04.2024 vide Form GST DRC-06. Thereafter, the respondent passed the impugned order dated 23.04.2024, wherein it is stated that the petitioner did not file nay reply and thereby confirmed the demand. The respondent ought to have considered the submissions made by the petitioner in their reply dated 10.04.2024 uploaded on 12.04.2024 and if the reply had to be considered, the ....