the cluster of residential, retail, small trade businesses that defines Kattupakkam's commercial fabric — handled by a qualified, in-house team
GST Revocation for Kattupakkam firms under Chennai West (Poonamallee Division) with WhatsApp document intake and same-day filed-acknowledgement delivery. Call 9566-068-468.
REG-22 is the order of revocation — when the proper officer is satisfied that revocation is in order, REG-22 is passed within 30 days of REG-21 reinstating the GSTIN. Note: in some references the show-cause notice numbering differs; the rejection SCN is REG-23 and the rejection order REG-05 / REG-24 depending on context.
Fixed fees · Zero hidden charges · Call 9566-068-468 for a custom quote.
Swipe to see all plans
Prices exclude GST. For enterprise pricing, call 9566-068-468.
Expert GST Revocation in Kattupakkam — qualified professionals, 15+ years experience, zero-penalty track record.
Notification 03/2023-Central Tax (read with 24/2023) provided amnesty for cancellation orders upto 31-Dec-2022. Where applicable, we leverage this notification to file REG-21 outside the regular window on amnesty conditions.
Cancellation order, pending invoices, bank statements and authorised signatory DSC details are shared via WhatsApp at 9566-068-468. Entire revocation handled remotely for Kattupakkam clients.
Our practice has handled registration restoration matters since the pre-GST era — service tax, VAT and excise registration restorations carried into GST suo motu cancellation revocations under Section 30. Deep institutional memory of jurisdictional officers.
Once REG-22 restores the GSTIN, we coordinate with your customers to ensure invoices for the cancellation period flow into their GSTR-2B and ITC is claimed within the Section 16(4) time bar — preserving customer relationships.
E-way bill generation on ewaybill.nic.in is automatically restored the working day after REG-22. We confirm the unblock and assist with the first post-revocation EWB to ensure goods movement resumes seamlessly.
All cancellation circumstances, default periods, financial distress details and revocation working papers are stored under access-controlled channels. Kattupakkam clients' sensitive default history is never shared with third parties.
Every GST Revocation engagement delivers measurable, guaranteed outcomes — expert professionals, on time, every time.
Why this matters here — In Kattupakkam, the business activity radiating outward from Kattupakkam Bus Stop and nearby commercial pockets; with quick access via Kattupakkam Bus Stop and feeder routes connecting Kattupakkam to the rest of Chennai.
Share documents via WhatsApp to 9566-068-468. No office visit required for Kattupakkam clients.
Miss any of these and the next consequence kicks in automatically.
Deadlines in this neighbourhood — In Kattupakkam, the cluster of residential, retail, small trade businesses that defines Kattupakkam's commercial fabric.
Deadline pressure points we see in Kattupakkam: Closer to Kattupakkam, for the professional and salaried population of Kattupakkam navigating personal-tax and home-office GST.
Appeal against the REG-05 order rejecting revocation, filed under Section 107 before the First Appellate Authority with the prescribed pre-deposit
Electronic application by a taxpayer for revocation of suo motu cancellation under Section 29(2); requires furnishing of all pending returns and payment of dues before submission is accepted by the common portal
Order passed by the proper officer revoking the suo motu cancellation and restoring the GSTIN; communicated electronically through the common portal
Notice issued by the proper officer where prima facie grounds exist to reject the REG-21 revocation application — typically incomplete returns, unpaid arrears, or insufficient reasoning for delay
Taxpayer's reply to REG-23 carrying clarifications, documentary proof of return-filing, payment challans, and submissions on reasonable cause for delay
Order of the proper officer rejecting the REG-21 revocation application after considering REG-24 reply or where no reply is received within the prescribed time
Cancellation order under Section 29(2) which is the order against which revocation under Section 30 is sought; the date of its communication starts the 90-day Section 30 clock
Show-cause notice preceding suo motu cancellation — addressing this at the REG-18 stage pre-empts the need for later revocation under Section 30
Every claim on this page can be traced back to a section or rule below.
Section 30 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act 2017 is the substantive provision empowering a registered person whose registration has been cancelled suo motu by the proper officer under Section 29(2) to seek restoration. Sub-section (1) of Section 30 provides that the application shall be filed in the prescribed manner within ninety days from the date of service of the cancellation order. The first proviso, as substituted by the Finance Act 2023, empowers the Commissioner or an officer authorised by him to extend the said period of ninety days by such further period not exceeding one hundred and eighty days. It is to be noted that revocation is available only against suo motu cancellation and not against voluntary cancellation under Section 29(1).
View sourceSub-rule (1) of Rule 23 of the CGST Rules prescribes Form GST REG-21 as the application for revocation, filed electronically on the common portal. The application must accompany payment of all dues, filing of all pending returns and payment of late fee and interest. Sub-rule (2) requires the proper officer, on being satisfied, to revoke the cancellation in Form REG-22 within thirty days. Sub-rule (3) prescribes Form REG-23 as the show-cause where the officer proposes to reject the revocation application, calling for reply in Form REG-24 within seven working days.
View sourceSection 29 is the gateway provision because revocation under Section 30 lies only against an order passed under Section 29(2). Sub-section (2) of Section 29 lists the suo motu grounds — contravention of prescribed provisions, non-filing of returns for the prescribed period, voluntary registration holder not commencing business within six months, registration obtained by fraud or wilful misstatement, or violation of Section 171 anti-profiteering. It is to be noted that the proper officer must afford an opportunity of being heard under the proviso before passing the cancellation order, failing which the order is itself amenable to challenge before revocation is even invoked.
View sourceNotification No. 03/2023 – Central Tax dated 31 March 2023 provided a special revocation amnesty for taxpayers whose registrations were cancelled on or before 31 December 2022 for non-filing of returns. The window allowed filing of REG-21 up to 30 June 2023 (extended later) subject to filing of all pending returns and payment of dues. It is to be noted that the amnesty operated as an exception to the ninety-day limitation under Section 30(1) and is no longer available, but it remains an interpretive guide for similar future amnesties.
View sourceClause (b) of sub-section (2) of Section 29 empowers the proper officer to cancel the registration of a person who has taken voluntary registration under Section 25(3) but has not commenced business within six months from the date of registration. Revocation in such cases requires the taxpayer to demonstrate, in the REG-21 application, that business has commenced — through invoices issued, GSTR-1 filed, bank statements showing business receipts, or commercial agreements executed.
View sourceSection 107 provides the appellate route against any decision or order passed under the CGST Act by an adjudicating authority. Sub-section (1) of Section 107 prescribes a three-month limitation from the date of communication of the order, extendable by one month under sub-section (4). Where a REG-21 revocation application is rejected by Form REG-05 after a REG-23 show-cause, the appellate remedy lies under Section 107 with pre-deposit of ten per cent of the disputed tax under sub-section (6).
View sourceRecords we prepare for Kattupakkam carry the geo-zone 600xx tag and coordinates 13.0436, 80.1450, which map each submission back to this locality. The 600xx geo-zone covering Kattupakkam groups several locality clusters under common administration, keeping documentation expectations predictable. Because PIN 600056 sits inside the Chennai West jurisdiction, the handling office for Kattupakkam stays consistent across years, which matters when filings or approvals span cycles. Kattupakkam is a residential growth pocket between Iyyappanthangal and Poonamallee with mid-tier apartments and supporting retail and small-trade.
Most commerce in Kattupakkam — invoices, expenses, purchases and statutory records — eventually surfaces in the GST Revocation working file we maintain for clients here. Freight and foot traffic from the Kattupakkam Bus Stop hub pull steady daily commerce through Kattupakkam, so there is rarely a quiet filing month in this residential growth pocket pocket. Vendors and customers tied to the Kattupakkam Bus Stop network show up across the invoice trail we reconcile for Kattupakkam GST Revocation clients. Working in Kattupakkam brings a logistical edge: proximity to Mount-Poonamallee Road and the Kattupakkam Bus Stop corridor keeps physical document handling fast.
The business mix in Kattupakkam centres on retail, and that sector carries its own GST Revocation quirks we plan for in advance. For a retail business in Kattupakkam, the GST Revocation scope is rarely generic; we tailor the checklist to how that sector actually transacts. A retail operator in Kattupakkam gets a GST Revocation workflow shaped by sector norms, not a one-size-fits-all template. The retail character of Kattupakkam commerce influences everything from invoice formats to the supporting documents a GST Revocation review needs.
We keep a repeatable GST Revocation checklist for Kattupakkam so nothing in the cycle is improvised or missed. Turnaround for Kattupakkam GST Revocation is deterministic — fixed fee, a scoped timeline, and a same-business-day acknowledgement once filed. Working papers for Kattupakkam GST Revocation engagements stay archived and retrievable, which makes any later notice or query straightforward to answer. Fixed-fee scoping means a Kattupakkam business knows the GST Revocation cost up front, with no surprise additions mid-engagement.
We treat Kattupakkam and Iyyappanthangal as one catchment for GST Revocation, which keeps documentation and turnaround consistent. Coverage from Kattupakkam naturally extends to Iyyappanthangal, so group entities across the area share one GST Revocation workflow. A client relocating between Kattupakkam and Iyyappanthangal keeps the same GST Revocation file and the same team. Group companies spread across Kattupakkam and Iyyappanthangal consolidate their GST Revocation under one engagement with us.
Common patterns in the Poonamallee Division give Kattupakkam businesses an early-warning map we use to pre-empt GST Revocation issues. Over several cycles in Kattupakkam, the recurring GST Revocation issues cluster around a predictable short list we screen for early. The GST Revocation mistakes we see most in Kattupakkam are avoidable with disciplined intake, which our checklist enforces. Recurring gaps in Kattupakkam small trade records are the first thing our GST Revocation review closes out.
Incorporating in Kattupakkam comes with jurisdiction, registration and GST Revocation steps that we sequence so nothing stalls the launch. A startup setting up near Kattupakkam Bus Stop in Kattupakkam gets a GST Revocation foundation built for the Poonamallee Division from day one. Shifting principal place of business to Kattupakkam means updating jurisdiction to the Chennai West, and we manage the paperwork end-to-end. Relocating a registered office into Kattupakkam (PIN 600056) changes the assessing division, and we handle that GST Revocation transition cleanly.
REG-21 revocation of suo motu cancelled GSTIN under Section 30 of the CGST Act for Kattupakkam businesses, filed within the 90/180 day statutory window with all pending returns cleared and tax dues paid.
A dedicated GST revocation consultant in Kattupakkam handles REG-19 cancellation order review, pending returns clearance, late fee and interest computation, REG-23 SCN reply and Commissioner extension requests beyond 90 days.
On-time REG-21 application within 90 days of the cancellation order in Kattupakkam avoids the need for High Court writ remedy. Where the window has lapsed, Notification 03/2023 amnesty conditions and Tvl Suguna Cutpiece principles are invoked.
For time-barred cases beyond the 180-day outer limit in Kattupakkam, writ remedy under Article 226 is pursued before the Madras High Court citing Tvl Suguna Cutpiece (W.P. 25048/2021) and Aap and Co. natural justice precedents.
Pending Section 73 or Section 74 proceedings do not by themselves bar revocation, but the proper officer may insist on stay of the demand under Section 107(7) or on payment of disputed tax before restoring the GSTIN. Integrated handling of both proceedings is advisable.
Section 29(2)(e) cancellation on fraudulent-registration grounds may be revoked where the underlying allegation is dropped or the registered person establishes that the alleged fraud was perpetrated by a third party such as an ex-employee or hacker. Documentary support is critical.
Yes. Casual taxable person registration under Section 27 can be extended even after lapse on a sufficient-cause prayer where in-transit consignments or pending compliance obligations remain. The extension allows completion of the original purpose without re-registration.
Hospital records, death certificate, FIR, lease termination notices, RBI directions, calamity notifications, and affidavits of non-service of REG-17 are commonly accepted. The documentation must establish that the delay beyond ninety days was for reasons beyond the applicant's reasonable control.
Beyond one hundred and eighty days the statute does not contemplate revocation by the proper officer or the Commissioner. Article 226 jurisdiction before the Madras High Court is the principal remedy, invoked where the High Court is satisfied that the delay was for exceptional reasons.
Yes. Where the proprietor passed away during the ninety-day window or before it commenced, the legal heir's prayer for extended revocation under the first proviso to Section 30(1) is a routinely accepted sufficient-cause ground supported by the death certificate and succession documents.
What Kattupakkam clients want to know before signing: Closer to Kattupakkam, on the Iyyappanthangal-Poonamallee corridor that passes through Kattupakkam.
Reading this guide locally — In Kattupakkam, in the residential growth pocket micro-market of Kattupakkam.
Revocation as a procedural remedy operates within the federal architecture of Article 246A which empowers both Parliament and State Legislatures to make laws on GST and Article 279A which constitutes the GST Council as the recommending body. The 47th GST Council meeting at Chandigarh, the 48th meeting and the 49th meeting iteratively refined the procedural timelines around Section 30, recognising that the original ninety-day Section 30(1) window had proved too tight for many registered persons whose books were disrupted by the cancellation itself. The Council recommendations translated into Notification 03/2023-Central Tax and Notification 23/2023-Central Tax amnesty schemes, evidencing that the Section 30 architecture is responsive to operational realities rather than rigidly statutory. The State-side concurrent provision in each State GST Act mirrors Section 30 of the CGST Act, so revocation operates uniformly across CGST, SGST and IGST limbs of the same registered person's identity.
The pre-GST indirect-tax regime under State VAT Acts and the Central Excise Act 1944 had no unified revocation architecture comparable to Section 30. State VAT cancellations were typically followed by fresh registration if the dealer wished to continue, with the prior credit balance generally forfeited. Central Excise registration under Rule 9 of the Central Excise Rules 2002 was structurally tied to the manufacturing premises and rarely cancelled administratively. The Empowered Committee 2009 First Discussion Paper noted this gap as a friction point in the destination-based design and recommended a unified revocation pathway with input-credit-chain preservation. Section 30 in its present form is the direct legislative response to that recommendation, and the comparative jump from forfeiture-under-VAT to ledger-preservation-under-GST is conceptually significant for understanding why the revocation window matters so much to the credit-chain.
Revocation of cancellation of registration occupies a distinct conceptual space within the GST framework, separate from cancellation under Section 29 and separate from fresh registration under Section 25. The Empowered Committee 2009 First Discussion Paper had treated the registration register as the foundational ledger of the destination-based design; Section 30 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act 2017 operationalises a recovery pathway when that ledger entry is removed administratively without the underlying business having ceased. The OECD International VAT/GST Guidelines treat registration continuity as essential to credit-chain integrity, and revocation is the mechanism by which an inadvertent break in that chain is reversed without forcing the registered person to begin afresh. The conceptual distinction matters because revocation preserves the original Goods and Services Tax Identification Number, the input tax credit ledger balance accumulated up to the cancellation date, the turnover history, and the customer-side invoice linkages already captured in GSTR-2B at the recipient end. Fresh registration under Section 25 would lose all four of these continuity advantages, which is why Section 30 sits as a discrete remedial section within Chapter VI of the CGST Act.
REG-24 annexures should specifically address the REG-23 concerns rather than restate the REG-21 annexures. Common REG-24 annexures include: an updated electronic credit ledger and cash ledger screenshot reflecting any post-REG-21 payments; an updated GSTR-3B filed-status screenshot covering any returns filed after REG-21 submission; correspondence with the principal place of business landlord or co-working operator confirming current occupancy where Rule 25 verification produced adverse observations; bank statement extracts demonstrating contemporary business operations; and any other contemporaneous evidence directly responsive to the REG-23 grounds. The annexures should be PDF format respecting portal size limits. Over-loading the reply with unrelated documents diffuses the response and is a practitioner-side error to avoid.
Where the proper officer remains unsatisfied with the REG-24 reply, the natural-justice framework under the first proviso to Section 30(2) requires that an opportunity of being heard be granted before any rejection order is passed. The opportunity of being heard is typically operationalised as a personal hearing scheduled on a working day at the jurisdictional office, with notice of the hearing date served through the common portal. The personal hearing is an opportunity for the registered person or their authorised representative to make oral submissions, present additional documents, and address the officer's residual concerns. Authorised representation is permitted under Section 116 of the CGST Act and is commonly exercised through chartered accountants or advocates. The personal hearing minutes are recorded by the officer and form part of the application record.
The REG-24 cycle terminates in one of two outcomes. Where the officer is satisfied on the basis of REG-21 read with REG-24 (and the personal hearing if held), the revocation order is passed in REG-22 and the GSTIN is restored. Where the officer remains unsatisfied, the rejection order is passed in Form REG-05 with reasons recorded in writing. The split outcome is binary; there is no partial-revocation or conditional-revocation outcome within the Section 30 framework. The REG-05 rejection order opens the Section 107 appellate route. The empirical incidence of REG-22 issuance after a REG-23 round, where the REG-24 reply has been carefully drafted with responsive annexures, is high — the natural-justice safeguard works in practice and rejection without merit is unusual.
Rule 23(1) of the CGST Rules empowers a registered person whose registration has been cancelled suo motu by the proper officer to submit a revocation application in Form GST REG-21 to the said proper officer, within thirty days computed from when the cancellation order is served on the applicant. The proviso to Rule 23(1) imposes the substantive precondition: provided that no application for revocation shall be filed if the registration has been cancelled for the failure of the registered person to furnish returns, unless such returns are furnished and any amount due as tax, in terms of such returns, has been paid along with any amount payable towards interest, penalty and late fee in respect of the said returns. The precondition is structural to the Section 30 framework.
The Rule 23(1) precondition covers all returns due for the period from the last return filed by the registered person to the date of the cancellation order. For a regular taxpayer this typically means GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B for each tax period in the default window. For composition taxpayers the equivalent is the quarterly CMP-08 and the annual GSTR-4. For non-resident taxable persons, casual taxable persons, input service distributors and other categories of registered persons, the corresponding return forms apply. The precondition is comprehensive: it is not satisfied by filing some but not all of the pending returns, nor by paying some but not all of the tax, interest, penalty and late fee. The proper officer's REG-21 review explicitly checks the completeness of the return filings against the cancellation-default window.
The amounts payable under the Rule 23(1) precondition are: tax under Section 9 and corresponding State and Integrated GST provisions on the outward supplies of the default period; interest under Section 50 at eighteen percent per annum on the tax amount from the original due date to the date of actual payment; penalty where any specifically applicable provision is engaged (commonly Section 122(1) provisions or the Section 73 or 74 general framework if a notice has been issued); and late fee under Section 47 at the per-day-per-return rate, capped at the prescribed ceiling. The Notification 07/2023-Central Tax slab provides relief on late fee for specified periods. The computation is head-wise (CGST, SGST or UTGST, and IGST separately) and is reflected in the electronic liability register before being discharged through the credit or cash ledger as the case may be.
Rule 22(3) of the CGST Rules permits the proper officer to determine the effective date of cancellation in the REG-19 order. The effective date is often the date from which the default crystallised (typically the date from which returns were not filed) rather than the date of the REG-19 order itself. This means the cancellation can operate retrospectively, affecting supplies made between the effective date and the REG-19 date. For Section 30 purposes, the retrospective effective date matters because the Rule 23(1) precondition requires all returns due to the date of cancellation to be filed — and the date of cancellation is the effective date determined in REG-19, not the REG-19 issuance date. The narrative reconstruction in the REG-21 must therefore align with the effective date for completeness.
Rule 22 of the CGST Rules sets out the procedural framework for cancellation under Section 29. Sub-rule (1) requires the proper officer to issue a notice in Form GST REG-17 before passing a cancellation order, except where the cancellation is sought by the registered person under Section 29(1). Sub-rule (2) requires the registered person to reply within seven working days in Form GST REG-18. Sub-rule (3) empowers the proper officer to pass the cancellation order in Form GST REG-19 within thirty days of receiving REG-18 or after expiry of the REG-18 reply window. The cancellation order in REG-19 is what triggers the Section 30 revocation route. Understanding the Rule 22 backdrop is important because REG-23 notices sometimes reference the REG-17 and REG-18 record, and the REG-21 narrative may need to address the underlying REG-17 reasons.
Rule 21A of the CGST Rules provides for suspension of registration pending cancellation proceedings. Sub-rule (1) permits the registered person who has applied for cancellation under Section 29(1) to be treated as suspended from the date of the application or such other date as the proper officer may determine. Sub-rule (2) permits suo motu suspension by the proper officer where contravention is alleged, with effect from a date determined by the officer. Sub-rule (2A) provides for automatic suspension where significant differences or anomalies are noticed under the rule's framework. Suspension is a distinct status from cancellation: returns cannot be filed during suspension, but the registered person continues to be a registered person for ITC purposes. Where the cancellation that triggers Section 30 was preceded by a Rule 21A suspension, the precondition return-filing exercise may need to address the suspension period separately.
What Kattupakkam clients usually ask next: Closer to Kattupakkam, for the professional and salaried population of Kattupakkam navigating personal-tax and home-office GST.
Notification 03/2024-CT dated 5 January 2024 issued under Section 148 introduced a special procedure for taxpayers whose registrations were cancelled on or before 31 March 2023 and who could not file revocation within prescribed time, allowing them to apply till 30 July 2024 on payment of dues, interest, and late fees. The second amnesty-style window in the Section 30 history.
Form ITC-01 is filed within 30 days of grant of fresh registration under Section 18(1) to claim input tax credit on inputs held in stock, inputs contained in semi-finished or finished goods, and capital goods on the day immediately preceding the date of grant. Useful where Section 30 revocation has lapsed and fresh REG-01 is the only option — recovers part of the stranded ITC.
Section 29(2)(c) of the CGST Act permits the proper officer to cancel a registration where the registered person has not furnished returns for a continuous period of six months. For composition taxpayers the period is three consecutive tax periods. This is the most common cancellation ground in MSME practice and is curable by filing the pending returns before REG-19 escalates.
Section 29(2)(e) permits cancellation where the registered person no longer exists at the principal place of business or is found to be non-existent on field verification. Cure requires substantive proof of existence — utility bills, property tax receipts, trade licences, neighbour affidavits, fresh field-visit request. The Tvl. Suguna Cutpiece Madras HC line supports substantive existence over single-visit findings.
Document Identification Number tagging on every notice issued under GST per CBIC Circular 122/41/2019. The REG-17, REG-19, REG-23 notices in the cancellation-revocation cascade all carry a DIN visible on the portal. Untagged communications can be treated as non est. Verifying DIN on the CBIC portal is a basic authentication step.
Section 169 of the CGST Act prescribes the valid modes of service of any notice, order, or communication — by hand, registered post, email at the registered address, portal upload to the registered taxpayer's dashboard, public notice in newspaper or affixing on PPOB. The 90-day Section 30 clock starts from the earliest of these valid modes of service, not necessarily the day the taxpayer actually opens the email.
A successful REG-22 revocation restores the GSTIN with effect from the original date of cancellation — no break in the ITC chain. Buyers who received supplies during the cancellation period can claim ITC on those invoices once the supplier files the missing GSTR-1s as part of the revocation cure. This continuity is the single biggest reason revocation is preferred over fresh REG-01.
Revocation is the statutory remedy under Section 30 of the CGST Act by which a registered person whose GSTIN was cancelled suo motu by the proper officer under Section 29(2) seeks restoration of the registration. It is procedurally distinct from withdrawal of a voluntary cancellation and from appeal under Section 107.
Suo motu cancellation is cancellation initiated by the proper officer on his own motion under Section 29(2) of the CGST Act, as distinguished from voluntary cancellation initiated by the taxpayer under Section 29(1). Only suo motu cancellation is amenable to revocation under Section 30.
REG-21 is the electronic form prescribed under Rule 23(1) for application for revocation of cancellation of registration. It is filed on the common portal after all pending returns are furnished and dues are paid, and is routed to the jurisdictional proper officer for disposal.
REG-22 is the order passed by the proper officer revoking a suo motu cancellation, restoring the GSTIN with effect from the date specified in the order. The order is communicated electronically and is the formal end-point of a successful revocation proceeding.
REG-23 is the show-cause notice issued by the proper officer proposing to reject a REG-21 revocation application — typically on grounds of unfiled returns, unpaid dues, or insufficient explanation for delay beyond the 90-day window. Reply lies in REG-24 within seven working days.
Numerical examples showing tax + interest + penalty across common default scenarios.
How Kattupakkam businesses typically avoid these: Closer to Kattupakkam, the business activity radiating outward from Kattupakkam Bus Stop and nearby commercial pockets, which is why for the professional and salaried population of Kattupakkam navigating personal-tax and home-office GST.
How the local trade mix shapes this — In Kattupakkam, the business activity radiating outward from Kattupakkam Bus Stop and nearby commercial pockets.
Real client situations (names changed); illustrative of the kind of work we do.
Why these Kattupakkam engagements look the way they do: Closer to Kattupakkam, the business activity radiating outward from Kattupakkam Bus Stop and nearby commercial pockets, which is why for the professional and salaried population of Kattupakkam navigating personal-tax and home-office GST.
“Our GSTIN was cancelled suo motu after we missed 8 months of GSTR-3B during a family medical emergency. FilingPro filed all pending returns, computed late fee and interest, and submitted REG-21 within the 90-day window. REG-22 came through in 14 working days. Saved our business from re-registration nightmare.”
“Our cancellation order was 6 months old when we approached FilingPro — well past the 90-day window. They drafted a Commissioner extension request with sufficient cause affidavit and got it allowed. REG-21 then went through. Genuinely impressed with their procedural depth.”
“Received REG-23 SCN after our REG-21 application. FilingPro drafted the reply within the 7-working-day window with supporting documents and case-law citations. The officer passed REG-22 after personal hearing. Strong drafting work.”
“Our case was 14 months past the cancellation order — completely time-barred. FilingPro filed a Madras HC writ petition citing Tvl Suguna Cutpiece (W.P. 25048/2021). The court directed the department to consider revocation. Eventually got REG-22 after filing all pending returns. Litigation-grade work.”
“FilingPro leveraged Notification 03/2023 amnesty for our 2021 cancellation order — would have been impossible otherwise. All pending GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B filed, late fee discharged, REG-21 went through under amnesty conditions. Excellent timing and knowledge.”
“After REG-22 was passed, FilingPro also handled the buyer-side ITC restoration — coordinated with our customers, ensured invoices flowed to their GSTR-2B and ITC was claimed within Section 16(4) limit. End-to-end revocation handling, not just a form filing.”
Common questions from Kattupakkam clients. Call 9566-068-468 for specific queries.
Across Kattupakkam we look after firms on 2nd Cross Street, 2nd street, 3rd street, Chennai Bypass Expressway and Porur Bridge as well as the Mount - Poonamallee - Avadi Road, Chettiar Agaram School Street, Chettiyaragaram Main Road and Noombal Road corridors — local GST Revocation without the cross-city travel.
Professional GST Revocation in Kattupakkam, Chennai. Call @ 9566-068-468. Offices at Maduravoyal, Nerkundram & Nolambur (upcoming). 15+ years experience, 4.9★ rated.
FilingPro Chennai — 15+ Years of Expert Tax & Business Consulting. Offices at Maduravoyal, Nerkundram & Nolambur (upcoming), Chennai. Call @ 9566-068-468. Disclaimer: Information on this page is for general guidance only and does not constitute legal, financial or tax advice. Consult a qualified professional for specific advice.