Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
D.Bharatha Chakravarthy, J
M/s Paper Corporation – Appellant
Versus
Assistant Commissioner, Circle III, Commercial Tax Department – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. discrepancy in gstr-2a amounts overlooked by authority. (Para 2) |
| 2. exemption claim lacked justification per respondent. (Para 3) |
| 3. remand for verifying bills and fresh assessment. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 4. writ allowed, orders set aside, matter remanded. (Para 6) |
O R D E R
This Writ Petition is filed challenging the impugned order dated
25.02.2026 passed on the rectification application submitted by the petitioner/assessee, seeking rectification of the assessment order dated
08.12.2025.
2. Upon hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, it is seen that while passing the assessment order, the respondent/assessing authority had concluded that the taxpayer had submitted GSTR-2A copies amounting to Rs.5,59,37,640/-. However, on a perusal of the statement of bills submitted, the learned counsel would submit that it is clear that the actual amount furnished was Rs.6,00,23,262/-. Therefore, when, on the face of it, the difference in amount has been overlooked by the respondent and when a rectification application was filed, the impugned order has been passed by assigning yet another erroneous reason as if the petitioner is challenging the levy itself.
3. The learned Additional Go
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
