^®
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 VINAYAGAR METALS vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ST) (FAC) , THE BRANCH MANAGER, CHENNAI
(Madras High Court)

Hon'ble Judges:

SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY

Pet. Counsel

P.v. Sudakar

Res. Counsel

K. Vasanthamala

Petitioner / Applicant	SRI VINAYAGAR METALS
Respondent	THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ST) (FAC) , THE BRANCH MANAGER, CHENNAI
Court	Madras High Court
State	Tamilnadu
Date	Jul 25, 2024
Order No.	W. P. No. 17915 of 2024 And W. M. P. Nos. 19653 & 19654 of 2024
Citation	2024(7) TAXREPLY 10333
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 30.12.2023 is challenged on the ground that the petitioner did not have a reasonable opportunity to contest the tax demand on merits. 2. Upon receipt of show cause notice dated 27.09.2023, by reply dated 27.10.2023, the petitioner stated that amounts due and payable towards supplies received by the petitioner were discharged by filing GSTR 3B returns. The impugned order in original was issued thereafter on 30.12.2023. The petitioner asserts that the detailed order was not uploaded on the portal and that only a summary thereof was uploaded. Until the bank attachment notice was received, the petitioner states that he was unaware of the impugned order. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has all necessary documents to establish that the supplies were genuine and such supplies were paid for by the petitioner. He seeks another opportunity to contest the tax proposal on merits. He also points out that the statutory....