2023 (4) TMI 698

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... le Mr.Justice M.Dhandapani For the Petitioner : Mr.B.Senniappan For the Respondents : Mr.T.Rameshkutty Sr.Standing Counsel (GST) ORDER Challenging the order of the second respondent dated 05.01.2023 and for a consequential direction to the first respondent to consider and pass orders on the representation dated 23.02.2022 followed by reminders dated 30.04.2022, 12.07.2022, 07.09.2022, 19.10.20 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ted as there is no notification issued by the Central/State. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the impugned order passed by the second respondent rejecting the application for extension time, is without jurisdiction and inconsistent with Rule 40(1)(b) of GST Rules. He would further submit that keeping the representations pending without passing any orders is agains .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 's request was rejected by the first respondent and the said order has been issued with the approval of the first respondent. 6. In view of the above, the order impugned in this writ petition is set aside and remitted to the first respondent, who shall pass appropriate orders, after hearing the petitioner, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 7. The .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X