1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
TaxTMI Login
🚀 New: Section-Wise Filter ✕
Just a moment...
1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
<h1>Tax Dispute Resolution: Petitioner Granted Partial Relief with Conditional Remand and Mandatory 10% Tax Payment</h1> The HC of Madras allowed the writ petition in a tax dispute, setting aside the original order and remanding it for reconsideration. The petitioner must ... Challenge to order passed by the respondent on the ground that the order was passed without affording an opportunity and in violation of principles of natural justice - mismatch of input tax claim under Section 73(5) of TNGST Act - HELD THAT:- In the instant case, it is seen that notice was issued by the respondent but however, the case was handled by some consultant who did not attend the personal hearing. On going through the impugned order, it is seen that a total tax liability of Rs.19.95 lakhs has been imposed against the petitioner. The petitioner has come up with a clear case that there are sufficient materials/documents to substantiate the defense of the petitioner to the effect that there was no mismatch of the input tax claim between GSTR2A and GSTR3B. This Court had an occasion to deal with a similar issue in WP.No.26477 of 2024 dated 12.09.2024. This Court wanted to afford an opportunity to the petitioner therein by putting the petitioner on terms. In order to maintain consistency, a similar order can be passed in this writ petition also - matter is remanded back to the file of the respondent for fresh consideration on condition that the petitioner will pay 10% of the disputed tax amount to the respondent within a period of four weeks from today. Petition allowed by way of remand. The High Court of Madras set aside the order of the respondent in a tax dispute case, remanding it back for fresh consideration. The petitioner must pay 10% of the disputed tax amount within four weeks, comply with conditions, and submit relevant documents within two weeks. The respondent must issue a fresh notice, provide a personal hearing, and pass final orders within three months. The writ petition was allowed with these directions, and no costs were awarded.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
