GST Revocation cadence for MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ firms near MEPZ Bus Stop — with same-day acknowledgement delivery
GST Revocation for electronics businesses in MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ near MEPZ-SEZ Tambaram by qualified experts with a 15+ year, zero-penalty record. 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 MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ — qualified professionals, 15+ years experience, zero-penalty track record.
Cancellation order, pending invoices, bank statements and authorised signatory DSC details are shared via WhatsApp at 9566-068-468. Entire revocation handled remotely for MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ 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. MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ clients' sensitive default history is never shared with third parties.
For MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ clients approaching us within the statutory 90-day window from REG-19, REG-21 is filed straight without need for Commissioner extension. Median REG-22 turnaround on our portfolio is 14 working days.
Every GST Revocation engagement delivers measurable, guaranteed outcomes — expert professionals, on time, every time.
Why this matters here — Across MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ, the business activity radiating outward from MEPZ-SEZ Tambaram and nearby commercial pockets. Practitioners note that with quick access via MEPZ Bus Stop and feeder routes connecting MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ to the rest of Chennai.
Share documents via WhatsApp to 9566-068-468. No office visit required for MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ clients.
Miss any of these and the next consequence kicks in automatically.
Deadlines in this neighbourhood — Across MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ, the cluster of electronics, engineering, garments businesses that defines MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ's commercial fabric.
Deadline pressure points we see in MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ: Closer to MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ, for MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ units balancing production cycles with monthly GST and quarterly TDS compliance.
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
Taxpayer's reply to the REG-17 show-cause; filing of all defaulted returns during this window can lead to REG-20 dropping of proceedings
Order dropping cancellation proceedings where the REG-18 reply is satisfactory — typically because all pending returns have been filed with dues paid
Summary monthly return capturing output tax, ITC availed, and net tax paid; every defaulted GSTR-3B for the period up to cancellation must be filed before REG-21 can be entertained
Monthly or quarterly statement of outward supplies; defaulted GSTR-1 filings up to date of cancellation are a precondition for REG-21
Annual return for composition taxpayers under Section 10; revocation by a composition taxpayer requires every defaulted GSTR-4 to be filed first
Cash challan used to deposit tax, interest, late fee and penalty into the Electronic Cash Ledger; balance is then debited against return filings preceding REG-21
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 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 39 of the CGST Act mandates monthly or quarterly return filing in Form GSTR-3B by every registered person. The first proviso to sub-rule (1) of Rule 23 bars the proper officer from accepting a REG-21 revocation application unless every return due till the date of cancellation order is furnished and the tax payable along with interest under Section 50 and late fee under Section 47 is discharged. Non-furnishing of returns under Section 39 for the prescribed continuous period itself constitutes the trigger for suo motu cancellation under Section 29(2)(c).
View sourceArticle 226 of the Constitution empowers High Courts to issue writs against any authority within their territorial jurisdiction. Where the statutory revocation window of two hundred and seventy days under Section 30 has lapsed, or where the proper officer has refused to extend without recording reasons, the Madras High Court has, in a consistent line of orders, exercised Article 226 jurisdiction to direct restoration subject to filing of returns and payment of dues. Writ practice has emerged as the residuary route in revocation matters.
View sourceNotification No. 23/2023 – Central Tax dated 17 July 2023 extended the revocation amnesty window originally provided by Notification 03/2023 from 30 June 2023 to 31 August 2023. The extension recognised the practical difficulty faced by small taxpayers in gathering bank statements, reconciling outward supplies, paying the accumulated dues and filing all pending returns within the original window. It is to be noted that no further extension was issued and the amnesty closed on 31 August 2023.
View sourceMEPZ-Tambaram SEZ (PIN 600045) falls under the Tambaram Division of the Chennai South, the jurisdiction that handles statutory matters for businesses at this PIN. Every MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ engagement we open begins with the basics: PIN 600045, the Tambaram Division, and the coordinates 12.9219, 80.1144 that anchor the locality. Businesses registered in MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ share the Chennai South jurisdiction, and their statutory matters route through the same Tambaram Division each time. Because PIN 600045 sits inside the Chennai South jurisdiction, the handling office for MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ stays consistent across years, which matters when filings or approvals span cycles.
Most commerce in MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ — invoices, expenses, purchases and statutory records — eventually surfaces in the GST Revocation working file we maintain for clients here. Document pickup near MEPZ-SEZ Tambaram is a same-hour errand for our MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ engagements rather than the half-day a typical Chennai client expects. Freight and foot traffic from the MEPZ Bus Stop hub pull steady daily commerce through MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ, so there is rarely a quiet filing month in this multi product export sez pocket. Each GST Revocation cycle for MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ reflects its commercial rhythm — invoices generated near MEPZ-SEZ Tambaram, expenses routed through the MEPZ Bus Stop freight network.
The business mix in MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ centres on engineering, and that sector carries its own GST Revocation quirks we plan for in advance. We have closed enough GST Revocation files for engineering firms near MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ to know where the department usually probes. GST Revocation for engineering businesses in MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ hinges on getting the sector's recurring entries right the first time. The engineering character of MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ commerce influences everything from invoice formats to the supporting documents a GST Revocation review needs.
Working papers for MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ GST Revocation engagements stay archived and retrievable, which makes any later notice or query straightforward to answer. From the first GST Revocation cycle, a MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ engagement is set up to be audit-ready rather than reconstructed under pressure later. Turnaround for MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ GST Revocation is deterministic — fixed fee, a scoped timeline, and a same-business-day acknowledgement once filed. Our MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ GST Revocation process is built to be predictable, documented, and on time, cycle after cycle.
From the same MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ team we also serve Tambaram and other nearby localities without re-onboarding clients. Proximity to Tambaram means a MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ engagement can extend across the locality cluster with no change in cadence. Coverage from MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ naturally extends to Tambaram, so group entities across the area share one GST Revocation workflow. Businesses straddling MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ and Tambaram get a single GST Revocation point of contact rather than two.
The GST Revocation mistakes we see most in MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ are avoidable with disciplined intake, which our checklist enforces. Because we work repeatedly across MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ, we can benchmark a new client's GST Revocation position against the locality norm. Patterns we track for MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ include electronics documentation gaps, timing mismatches, and the questions the Tambaram Division tends to raise. Recurring gaps in MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ electronics records are the first thing our GST Revocation review closes out.
When a Tambaram West business expands into MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ, we extend its GST Revocation setup to PIN 600045 without disruption. New electronics ventures in MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ lean on us to stand up GST Revocation correctly before the first deadline rather than after a notice. For a new business incorporating in MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ or shifting its principal place of business here, GST Revocation setup is one of the first things to get right. We onboard new MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ entities onto a GST Revocation cadence that is audit-ready from the very first cycle.
REG-21 revocation of suo motu cancelled GSTIN under Section 30 of the CGST Act for MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ businesses, filed within the 90/180 day statutory window with all pending returns cleared and tax dues paid.
A dedicated GST revocation consultant in MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ 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 MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ 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 MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ, 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.
Where the cancellation ground was Section 29(2)(b) non-conduct of business at the principal place, a fresh physical verification is typically directed. The applicant should keep the premises ready with signboard, lease deed, electricity bill and operating staff for the verification visit.
Composition-scheme cancellation under Rule 6 is distinct from GSTIN cancellation under Section 29. Where the composition option lapses and the GSTIN itself is cancelled for migration default, REG-21 must be combined with the regular-scheme tax-back computation and CMP-04 filing.
Yes. Section 50 of the CGST Act prescribes interest at eighteen per cent per annum on tax not paid by the due date. The interest accrues from the original due date until actual payment, even where the payment is contemporaneous with REG-21 filing.
Section 47 of the CGST Act prescribes late fee of fifty rupees per day for non-nil returns and twenty rupees per day for nil returns, subject to a notified ceiling per return. CBIC amnesty notifications periodically cap the cumulative late fee.
Yes. The legal heir files REG-14 to update proprietor particulars, files REG-21 with the death certificate and legal heir certificate, and files ITC-02 to transfer accumulated input tax credit. Section 18(3) of the CGST Act read with Rule 41 governs the credit transfer.
Refund claims filed before cancellation continue on file but disbursement is typically held until GSTIN is restored. Fresh refund claims for excess cash ledger balance can be filed even during cancellation under the dedicated cash-ledger refund category which has no time limit.
What MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ clients want to know before signing: Closer to MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ, around the MEPZ-SEZ Tambaram catchment of MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ.
Reading this guide locally — Across MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ, on the Tambaram-Chromepet corridor that passes through MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ.
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.
Notification 07/2023-Central Tax, issued pursuant to the 49th GST Council meeting recommendation, provided one-time late-fee relief for specified categories of returns relating to historical tax periods. The notification capped the aggregate late fee at specified amounts for taxpayers filing the pending returns within the notified window. The design objective was to enable taxpayers whose GSTINs had been cancelled or were on the verge of cancellation under Section 29(2)(c) to clear the Rule 23(1) precondition at a manageable cost, thereby unlocking the Section 30 revocation route. The notification is one of the principal pieces of the amnesty architecture surrounding Section 30 and is conceptually distinct from Notification 03/2023-Central Tax (which provided an extended revocation window itself).
For a revocation candidate, Notification 07/2023-Central Tax (late-fee relief) and Notification 03/2023-Central Tax (extended revocation window for historical cancellations) operate as a paired amnesty package. Notification 03/2023 opened a special-window for filing REG-21 for cancellations falling within specified historical periods; Notification 07/2023 reduced the late-fee cost of the Rule 23(1) precondition compliance that REG-21 requires. The paired design effectively enabled mass restoration of cancelled GSTINs at moderate cost, with both notifications scheduled to expire on stated dates. Notification 23/2023-Central Tax further extended the architecture for additional historical categories. The interaction matters operationally because revocation candidates falling within the covered windows should explicitly invoke both notifications in their REG-21 narrative.
The computation discipline for late-fee discharge under the relief notifications requires careful tabulation. The base computation is the per-day-per-return liability under Section 47 read with the applicable slab; the relief cap under the notification then applies as the ceiling. The working paper for each return should show: the original due date, the actual filing date, the days of delay, the per-day rate, the unfettered liability, the notification-cap, and the final discharged amount. The aggregate working paper across all returns provides the audit trail that the REG-21 reviewing officer can verify. Where the cancellation-default window straddles periods within the covered notification window and periods outside it, the working paper should segregate the two so that the cap is applied only on the covered periods.
The amnesty notifications surrounding Section 30 derive from Article 279A(4) recommendations of the GST Council read with the executive powers under Section 128 of the CGST Act. Section 128 empowers the central government, on the recommendation of the Council, by notification, to waive in part or in full any penalty referred to in Section 122 or Section 123 or Section 125 or any late fee referred to in Section 47 for such class of taxpayers and under such mitigating circumstances as may be specified therein. The amnesty notifications are issued under this rule-making power and represent the executive arm of the GST Council's deliberative recommendations. Understanding the constitutional and statutory basis is important because the notifications are not standalone instruments but operationalisations of Council recommendations.
Notification 03/2023-Central Tax, issued on 31 March 2023 pursuant to the 49th GST Council recommendation, opened a special window for filing REG-21 for cancellations under Section 29(2)(b) and (c) where the order was passed up to 31 December 2022. The notification extended the time limit under Section 30(1) for such cancellations to 30 June 2023, subject to all returns being filed and dues being paid. The design objective was to enable a backlog of taxpayers who had missed the original window to access the Section 30 route through a defined relief period. The notification provided certainty around the relief window dates and was paired with Notification 07/2023 on late-fee relief to make the path operationally viable.
Notification 23/2023-Central Tax, issued in July 2023 pursuant to the 50th GST Council recommendation, extended the Notification 03/2023 amnesty further. The extension covered additional cancellations and pushed the filing window forward. The recurring extensions reflected the GST Council's recognition that taxpayer awareness of the amnesty was uneven and that a single window often did not reach all affected taxpayers. The extensions were not unconditional; they continued to require Rule 23(1) precondition compliance and the substantive bona fides of revocation. The amnesty architecture is therefore best understood as a procedural facilitation rather than a substantive concession — the underlying default still has to be cured, but the timing window for the cure is enlarged.
Beyond the first appeal under Section 107 lies the Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal under Section 109 of the CGST Act read with subsequent amendments operationalising the Tribunal architecture. The Tribunal is the second appellate forum and reviews orders of the first Appellate Authority. As an alternate parallel route, where the rejection order suffers from a jurisdictional error or violates fundamental natural-justice principles, a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution before the jurisdictional High Court is available. The writ route bypasses the appellate hierarchy but is generally invoked only where the appellate route is inadequate or where the question is of broader legal significance. The Section 107 first appeal remains the principal and most efficient remedy for ordinary revocation rejection orders.
Section 107 of the CGST Act provides the first appellate remedy against any decision or order passed under the Act by an adjudicating authority. Sub-section (1) opens the appeal to any person aggrieved by any decision or order passed by an adjudicating authority. The appeal lies to the Appellate Authority (typically the Joint Commissioner Appeals or Additional Commissioner Appeals depending on the jurisdiction and the monetary limit set under Section 107(3)). The limitation under Section 107(1) is three months from the date on which the order is communicated to the person aggrieved. Section 107(4) permits the Appellate Authority to allow an additional one-month period beyond the three-month limit on sufficient cause being shown. The combined window is therefore four months at the outer edge.
Section 107(6) of the CGST Act requires a pre-deposit before the appeal can be entertained. The pre-deposit is the full amount of tax, interest, fine, fee and penalty arising from the impugned order that the appellant has admitted plus ten percent of the remaining amount of tax in dispute arising from the said order, subject to a cap. The pre-deposit operates as a procedural threshold rather than a substantive concession. In the context of revocation rejection under REG-05, the pre-deposit requirement is generally minimal because the underlying order is a procedural rejection of the revocation application rather than a tax-demand order. The Section 107(6) framework is nevertheless engaged and the pre-deposit calculation should be done before filing the appeal to avoid procedural delays.
What MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ clients usually ask next: Closer to MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ, for MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ units balancing production cycles with monthly GST and quarterly TDS compliance.
Article 226 writ is the residuary constitutional remedy before a High Court used where statutory revocation has lapsed without taxpayer fault, where the Commissioner has refused extension without recording reasons, or where rejection is passed without personal hearing in breach of Section 75(4).
Madras High Court is the High Court exercising Article 226 jurisdiction over Tamil Nadu and Puducherry. It has, in a consistent line of orders, directed restoration of cancelled GSTINs subject to filing of returns and payment of dues, particularly where the procedural lapse was on the department's side.
Fresh registration is the fallback route under Form REG-01 when the outer 270-day revocation window has expired. It severs continuity with the cancelled GSTIN — pre-cancellation ITC cannot be carried forward, and a new GSTIN with a new effective date is issued.
Composition cancellation is suo motu cancellation under the proviso to Section 29(2)(b) where a composition taxpayer fails to file GSTR-4 for three consecutive tax periods. Revocation requires every defaulted GSTR-4 plus quarterly CMP-08 statements to be filed before REG-21.
ECL deposit is the act of depositing money into the Electronic Cash Ledger through a PMT-06 challan; the ECL balance is then debited against return-filing liabilities. For revocation, the ECL must be loaded with the aggregate dues before defaulted returns can be filed.
Service of order refers to the formal communication of REG-19 to the taxpayer through the common portal email, registered SMS and portal status update. The date of service — not the date of signing — is the limitation-starting date for Section 30 computation.
Reasoned order is the requirement under Section 75(6) of the CGST Act that any order under the Act must record the reasons forming the basis of the decision. A REG-05 rejection of revocation without reasons is amenable to challenge before the appellate forum or in writ.
Condonation of delay is the discretionary power to overlook procedural delay where sufficient cause is shown. In revocation, condonation operates through the Commissioner's 180-day extension power under the Section 30 proviso, and beyond that through Section 107(4) appellate condonation of one month.
Anti-profiteering ground is the cancellation trigger under Section 29(2)(d) read with Section 171 — violation of the requirement to pass on rate reduction or ITC benefit to the recipient. Revocation against this ground typically requires the NAA / GST Appellate Authority order to be set aside or complied with first.
Rule 86B ground is a cancellation trigger where the taxpayer has failed to discharge at least one per cent of output tax liability in cash, in violation of Rule 86B that applies to taxpayers with monthly taxable turnover above ₹50 lakh. Revocation requires demonstration of compliance or applicability of the rule's exceptions.
Fake invoice cancellation is a high-stakes cancellation under Section 29(2)(e) read with Rule 21(b) where the registration is alleged to have been used to issue invoices without underlying supply. Revocation requires factual demonstration of actual supply, often supported by transport documents and e-way bills.
Continuity of business is the factual element a revocation applicant must demonstrate — that the underlying business has not been discontinued and there is a genuine intent to resume compliant operations. Recent invoices, employee records, premises evidence and bank statements are commonly relied upon.
Numerical examples showing tax + interest + penalty across common default scenarios.
How MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ businesses typically avoid these: Closer to MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ, the business activity radiating outward from MEPZ-SEZ Tambaram and nearby commercial pockets, which is why for MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ units balancing production cycles with monthly GST and quarterly TDS compliance.
How the local trade mix shapes this — Across MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ, the business activity radiating outward from MEPZ-SEZ Tambaram and nearby commercial pockets.
Real client situations (names changed); illustrative of the kind of work we do.
Why these MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ engagements look the way they do: Closer to MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ, the business activity radiating outward from MEPZ-SEZ Tambaram and nearby commercial pockets, which is why for MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ units balancing production cycles with monthly GST and quarterly TDS compliance.
“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 MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ clients. Call 9566-068-468 for specific queries.
Across MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ we look after firms on Gandhi Road, Tambaram - Somangalam Road, MES Road, Muthuranga Mudali Street and Old State Bank Road (Forest Road) as well as the Tambaram Perungalathur Road, Thiruneermalai Road, Grand Southern Trunk Road and Major Mukund Varadharajan Salai corridors — local GST Revocation without the cross-city travel.
Professional GST Revocation in MEPZ-Tambaram SEZ, 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.