Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Krishnan Ramasamy, J
Pandi Ravichandran Proprietor, M/s. RS Constructions – Appellant
Versus
The Deputy Commissioner (CT), GST - Appeal – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. grounds for challenging a decision rejecting appeal due to delay. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 2. discussion on the petitioner's readiness to comply with deposit requirements. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. court's analysis of the justification for delay in filing the appeal. (Para 7 , 9) |
| 4. final court ruling and directions regarding the appeal. (Para 10) |
Order
Ms.AmirthapoonkodiDinakaran, learned Government Advocate (Taxes), takes notice on behalf of the respondents. With consent, the main Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission itself.
2. The challenge in this Writ Petition is to the order dated
7.05.2025 passed by the 1st respondent and to quash the same and for a consequential direction to the 1st respondent to take up the appeal filed by the petitioner on file.
3. The learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the 2nd respondent issued show cause notice dated 08.05.2025, for which the petitioner submitted its reply. But, the 2nd respondent without considering the same in a proper perspective and without providing an opportunity of personal hearing has passed the order dated 03.10.2024. Subsequently,the petitioner filed an appeal before the 1st respondent on
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
