M\/s. SRTC Tech Solutions Pvt. Ltd. Versus The Assistant Commissioner (CT), Goods and Services Tax Network (GSTN), Goods and Services Tax Council (GST Council), Union of India
GST
2018 (12) TMI 889 – MADRAS HIGH COURT – TMI
MADRAS HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 11-12-2018
Writ Petition No. 28209 of 2018
GST
Mr. Justice K. Ravichandrabaabu
\nFor the Petitioner : Mr.ANR.Jayaprathap
\nFor the Respondents : Mr.M.Hariharan, Additional Government Pleader for R1, Mr.V.Sundareswaran, Standing Counsel for R2, Mr.S.R.Sundar, Standing Counsel for R3 and R4.
\nORDER
\nThe petitioner seeks for a Mandamus to direct the respondents to take actions as may be necessary, including re-opening the common portal and extending the time period for filin<\/p>\n
= = = = = = = =<\/p>\n
Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n not succeed due to technical problems on the common portal GSTN. Therefore, the petitioner approached the Assessing Officer on 25.04.2018 with enclosures to substantiate that they made genuine attempt to upload the electronic Form GST TRAN-1. The first respondent, in turn, directed the petitioner to approach the Nodal Officer on this subject. It is stated that the non-submission for Form GST TRAN-1 within time was not due to the fault of the petitioner. = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" M\/s. SRTC Tech Solutions Pvt. Ltd. Versus The Assistant Commissioner (CT), Goods and Services Tax Network (GSTN), Goods and Services Tax Council (GST Council), Union of IndiaGST2018 (12) TMI 889 – MADRAS HIGH COURT – TMIMADRAS HIGH COURT – HCDated:- 11-12-2018Writ Petition No. 28209 of 2018 GSTMr. Justice K. Ravichandrabaabu For the Petitioner : Mr.ANR.Jayaprathap … Continue reading “M\/s. SRTC Tech Solutions Pvt. Ltd. Versus The Assistant Commissioner (CT), Goods and Services Tax Network (GSTN), Goods and Services Tax Council (GST Council), Union of India”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-15553","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15553","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=15553"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15553\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=15553"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=15553"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=15553"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
\n4. This Court, in various writ petitions, has already considered the similar difficulties expressed by similarly situated persons and disposed of those writ petitions with certain directions.
\n5. A counter affidavit is filed by the respondent wherein it is stated that the first respondent h<\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n