The court set aside the impugned order passed by the respondent ...

Court Annuls Tax Order: Petitioner Wins Reconsideration Over Alleged Filing Discrepancies, Must Pay 10% Demand to Proceed.

October 15, 2024

Case Laws GST HC

The court set aside the impugned order passed by the respondent u/s 73 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 2017, imposing a liability of Rs. 10.72 lakhs towards tax, interest, and penalty on the petitioner due to a discrepancy between Forms GSTR 3B and GSTR 1. The petitioner claimed a violation of natural justice as they were unaware of the proceedings initiated by the respondent, with communication sent only through the portal. The court found sufficient materials to substantiate the petitioner's defense that there was no mismatch between the outward supplies turnover declared in GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B. Consistent with a previous case, the matter was remanded to the respondent for fresh consideration, subject to the petitioner paying 10% of the total demand within four weeks. The petition was allowed by way of remand.

View Source

← Previous Next →

The court set aside the impugned order passed by the respondent ...

Court Annuls Tax Order: Petitioner Wins Reconsideration Over Alleged Filing Discrepancies, Must Pay 10% Demand to Proceed.

October 15, 2024

Case Laws GST HC

You may also like:

The petitioner challenged the order and summary order alleging discrepancies between GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B, and excess availment of Input Tax Credit (ITC). The petitioner...

The High Court address the rejection of revision petition u/s 264 due to an inadvertent error in filing Form ITR-VII, resulting in denial of exemption to a trust...

Validity of reassessment proceedings questioned due to delayed digital submission of Form 10. Emphasis on due disclosure over procedural digital filing requirements....

The court held that the reversal of Input Tax Credit (ITC) by the department due to discrepancy between GSTR 3B and auto-populated GSTR 2A violated principles of natural...

Validity of assessment order - Discrepancy Nos. 1, 2, 10, and 11: The discrepancies include issues such as non-GST supplies, alleged mismatch between GSTR-3B and GSTR-1...

The High Court set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter back to the respondent authority to pass a fresh order. This was subject to the condition that the...

The High Court held that petitioners are entitled to pay 10% of the disputed GST amount as a pre-condition for filing an appeal by debiting the amount available in the...

The Madras High Court found a violation of natural justice as notices were only uploaded on the GST portal without direct communication to the petitioner. The tax...

Filing of Form 10-IE to opt for the new tax regime u/s 115BAC is directory, not mandatory. If filed before assessment, the Assessing Officer must consider it. The...

Denial of benefit u/s 115BAA of reduced rate of tax @22% - Domestic Companies - Condonation of delay in filing of Form No. 10-IC by the assessee - The Appellate Tribunal...

The HC quashed the denial of benefits under Section 115BAB, ruling that filing Form 10-ID after the due date was a procedural lapse that should not invalidate the...

Denial of input tax credit - demand of differential input tax - The court notes the discrepancy in the GST numbers but suggests the petitioner could obtain certification...

In a High Court case, the petitioner challenged an order due to inability to respond to show cause notice or participate in proceedings because of cancer diagnosis....

Eligibility for Input Tax Credit - Failure to report outward supply - The objection of the petitioner is that most of these items do not fall within the reverse charge...

The High Court found a violation of natural justice as the petitioner was not given a fair opportunity to contest a tax demand. The tax proposal was upheld due to the...

Quick Updates: