9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (4) TMI 1504X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hnan Ramasamy For the Petitioner : Mr. A.N.R. Jayaprathap For the Respondents : Mr. Su.Srinivasan Senior Panel Counsel and Mr.T.Nalinidhar Junior Panel Counsel (R1) Mr.C.Harsha Raj (R2) Special Government Pleader (Taxes) ORDER This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned order dated 13.03.2025 passed by the 1st Respondent and to quash the same. 2. Mr. Su.Srinivasan, learned Seni ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oner filed the rectification petition under Section 161 of the TNGST Act, 2017 before the 2nd respondent and the same was rejected vide order dated 22.02.2025. Thereafter, the petitioner filed an appeal before the 1st respondent on 03.03.2025 challenging the assessment and rectification order, with a delay of 108 days. The 1st Respondent vide order dated 13.03.2025 dismissed the appeal on the grou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he assessment order. But instead of filing appeal, the petitioner filed rectification petition. However, he would fairly submit that the delay may be condoned on terms. 6. In reply, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has already deposited 10% of the disputed tax at the time of filing appeal and now ready to deposit another 5% of disputed tax over and above the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... condone the delay of 108 days in filing the Appeal before the 1st Respondent. Accordingly, this Court passes the following order:- (i) Accordingly, the impugned order dated 13.03.2025 passed by the 1st respondent is set aside and the delay of 108 days in filing the appeal before the 1st respondent is condoned subject to payment of 5% of disputed tax demand before the 1st respondent, within a per ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
