^®
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. |

SUNDARAPANDIAN vs. THE STATE TAX OFFICER-1 & OTHERS
(Madras High Court)

Hon'ble Judges:

C. SARAVANAN

Pet. Counsel

T.m. Madasamy

Res. Counsel

R. Suresh Kumar

Petitioner / Applicant	SUNDARAPANDIAN
Respondent	THE STATE TAX OFFICER-1 & OTHERS
Court	Madras High Court
State	Tamilnadu
Date	Jul 29, 2024
Order No.	W. P. (MD). No. 17429 of 2024
Citation	2024(7) TAXREPLY 10513
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 The petitioner is aggrieved by the impugned order, dated 12.02.2024 passed by the 1st respondent for the assessment year 2018-19. The impugned order precedes notices in DRC-01A, dated 26.10.2023 and DRC-01, dated 15.11.2023. 2. Heard the learned counsels on either side and this writ petition is disposed at the time of admission after dispensing with counter. 3. The contention of the petitioner is that the impugned order has been passed without issuance of the aforesaid notices and therefore, there is a gross violation of principles of natural justice. 4. On the other hand, the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents would submit that the notices that preceded impugned orders were posted in the GST common portal and the petitioner ought to have participated in the said proceedings. Instead, the petitioner has chosen to remain mute and has suffered the impugned order. It is further submitted that in any event the petitioner is not with....