GST Revocation for residential units around GST Road, Perungalathur — and a zero-penalty filing record
GST Revocation for residential businesses in Perungalathur near Perungalathur Railway Station — qualified review, a 7-year workpaper archive and fixed fees from day one. Call 9566-068-468.
Once REG-22 restores the GSTIN, the supplier files pending GSTR-1 for the cancellation period and the invoices auto-populate to recipients' GSTR-2B. Recipients may then claim ITC subject to the Section 16(4) time bar — typically 30th November of the following financial year or filing of GSTR-9 whichever earlier.
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 Perungalathur — qualified professionals, 15+ years experience, zero-penalty track record.
For Perungalathur 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.
All pending GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B for the cancellation period are filed with ARN before REG-21. The portal Rule 23(1) block is pre-emptively cleared so the application sails through without rejection.
Section 47 late fee (₹50/day, ₹20/day NIL) and Section 50 interest at 18% per annum on net cash liability are computed period-by-period and discharged through PMT-06 / DRC-03 before REG-21 — eliminating the most common rejection ground.
For Perungalathur cases between 90 and 180 days, we draft the Commissioner extension request with a detailed sufficient cause affidavit covering illness, family bereavement, accountant default or business disruption — converting time-barred cases into within-window cases.
Where the officer issues REG-23 minded to reject, our reply is drafted and filed within the 7-working-day window with supporting evidence and case-law citations. Personal hearing representation under Rule 23(3) is included at no extra cost.
For Perungalathur cases beyond 180 days, we file a writ petition before the Madras HC under Article 226 citing Tvl Suguna Cutpiece (W.P. 25048/2021) and Aap and Co. natural justice principles to direct the department to consider belated revocation.
Every GST Revocation engagement delivers measurable, guaranteed outcomes — expert professionals, on time, every time.
Why this matters here — Across Perungalathur, the cluster of residential, retail, light manufacturing businesses that defines Perungalathur's commercial fabric. Practitioners note that served by short connections to Vandalur and Tambaram and onward to central Chennai.
Share documents via WhatsApp to 9566-068-468. No office visit required for Perungalathur clients.
Miss any of these and the next consequence kicks in automatically.
Deadlines in this neighbourhood — Across Perungalathur, the business activity radiating outward from Perungalathur Railway Station and nearby commercial pockets.
Deadline pressure points we see in Perungalathur: Where Perungalathur differs: for the professional and salaried population of Perungalathur navigating personal-tax and home-office GST.
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
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
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 75 contains general procedural safeguards applicable across adjudicatory exercises under the CGST Act. Sub-section (4) of Section 75 mandates that an opportunity of personal hearing shall be granted where a request is received in writing or where any adverse decision is contemplated. It is to be noted that this principle has been imported by Madras High Court rulings into the revocation context — rejection of REG-21 without a personal hearing on the REG-23 show-cause is amenable to challenge under Article 226.
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 sourceCircular No. 158/14/2021-GST dated 6 September 2021 clarified the procedural mechanism for filing revocation applications during the extended period granted by the Joint Commissioner and Commissioner under the then-prevailing proviso to Section 30(1). The circular continues to be cited for the underlying principle that the extension is not automatic — it requires a written application with reasonable cause shown, and the extending authority must record reasons in writing. Post-Finance Act 2023, the same principle applies to the consolidated 180-day extension power.
View sourceThe Finance Act 2023 substituted the proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 30 with effect from 1 October 2023. The earlier two-tier extension — sixty days by the Additional or Joint Commissioner and a further sixty days by the Commissioner — was replaced with a single outer extension of one hundred and eighty days exercisable by the Commissioner or an officer authorised by him. The total outer window from the date of cancellation order therefore stands at two hundred and seventy days, beyond which Section 30 itself ceases to be available and the taxpayer must apply for fresh registration in Form REG-01.
View sourcePerungalathur is a residential locality on the GST Road corridor with neighbourhood retail light manufacturing and logistics units. We keep a cycle-by-cycle record of how the Tambaram Division of the Chennai South handles Perungalathur filings and approvals. Statutory correspondence for Perungalathur businesses routes through the Tambaram Division, so we align every GST Revocation engagement to that jurisdiction from the start. Approvals, acknowledgements and queries for Perungalathur businesses tie back to the Tambaram Division, so our GST Revocation cadence accounts for how that office works.
Document pickup near Perungalathur Railway Station is a same-hour errand for our Perungalathur engagements rather than the half-day a typical Chennai client expects. Each GST Revocation cycle for Perungalathur reflects its commercial rhythm — invoices generated near Perungalathur Railway Station, expenses routed through the Perungalathur Railway Station freight network. Perungalathur sustains a medium flow of commerce for a residential mixed with neighbourhood commerce locality, and that flow is the raw material for the GST Revocation files we close here. Most commerce in Perungalathur — invoices, expenses, purchases and statutory records — eventually surfaces in the GST Revocation working file we maintain for clients here.
The residential firms we serve in Perungalathur value a GST Revocation partner who already understands their sector's compliance rhythm. Because Perungalathur hosts a cluster of residential businesses, we benchmark each new GST Revocation engagement against patterns we already track for the locality. GST Revocation for residential businesses in Perungalathur hinges on getting the sector's recurring entries right the first time. For a residential business in Perungalathur, the GST Revocation scope is rarely generic; we tailor the checklist to how that sector actually transacts.
We keep a repeatable GST Revocation checklist for Perungalathur so nothing in the cycle is improvised or missed. Working papers for Perungalathur GST Revocation engagements stay archived and retrievable, which makes any later notice or query straightforward to answer. A Perungalathur client sees the same GST Revocation cadence each cycle: intake, reconciliation, review, filing, acknowledgement. From the first GST Revocation cycle, a Perungalathur engagement is set up to be audit-ready rather than reconstructed under pressure later.
GST Revocation clients in Mannivakkam are handled by the same practitioners who run our Perungalathur desk. We treat Perungalathur and Mannivakkam as one catchment for GST Revocation, which keeps documentation and turnaround consistent. Businesses straddling Perungalathur and Mannivakkam get a single GST Revocation point of contact rather than two. Coverage from Perungalathur naturally extends to Mannivakkam, so group entities across the area share one GST Revocation workflow.
Over several cycles in Perungalathur, the recurring GST Revocation issues cluster around a predictable short list we screen for early. Each engagement in Perungalathur adds to a record of what the Chennai South jurisdiction expects, sharpening the next GST Revocation file. Patterns we track for Perungalathur include logistics documentation gaps, timing mismatches, and the questions the Tambaram Division tends to raise. Common patterns in the Tambaram Division give Perungalathur businesses an early-warning map we use to pre-empt GST Revocation issues.
Relocating a registered office into Perungalathur (PIN 600063) changes the assessing division, and we handle that GST Revocation transition cleanly. A startup setting up near GST Road in Perungalathur gets a GST Revocation foundation built for the Tambaram Division from day one. New residential ventures in Perungalathur lean on us to stand up GST Revocation correctly before the first deadline rather than after a notice. Incorporating in Perungalathur comes with jurisdiction, registration and GST Revocation steps that we sequence so nothing stalls the launch.
REG-21 revocation of suo motu cancelled GSTIN under Section 30 of the CGST Act for Perungalathur businesses, filed within the 90/180 day statutory window with all pending returns cleared and tax dues paid.
A dedicated GST revocation consultant in Perungalathur 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 Perungalathur 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 Perungalathur, 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.
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.
Rule 23(2) prescribes thirty working days from the date of the application or from the date of REG-24 reply, where REG-23 has been issued. In practice complete applications without show cause are decided within four to six weeks.
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.
What Perungalathur clients want to know before signing: Where Perungalathur differs: in the residential mixed with neighbourhood commerce micro-market of Perungalathur.
Reading this guide locally — Across Perungalathur, around the Perungalathur Railway Station catchment of Perungalathur.
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.
Section 30(1) of the CGST Act opens with the phrase any registered person whose registration is cancelled by the proper officer on his own motion, which narrows the section's coverage to suo motu cancellations under Section 29(2). The grounds enumerated in Section 29(2) are: contravention of provisions of the Act or rules made thereunder under clause (a); non-furnishing of returns for a continuous period of six months under clause (c) for regular taxpayers and three consecutive tax periods under clause (b) for composition taxpayers; non-commencement of business within six months of voluntary registration under clause (d); and registration obtained by means of fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression of facts under clause (e). Section 30 covers all five clauses but the practical incidence is heavily concentrated in clause (c) non-filing cancellations. Where the cancellation is recorded under Section 29(1) at the registered person's own request through Form REG-16, Section 30 is not the appropriate route; fresh registration under Section 25 would apply.
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.
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.
The second proviso to Section 30(1), also a Finance Act 2020 insertion read with Finance Act 2023 alignment, empowered the Commissioner to further extend the period referred to in the first proviso on sufficient cause being shown. The Commissioner extension can be granted for a period not exceeding thirty days, taking the cumulative window from one hundred and twenty days under the first proviso to one hundred and fifty days. The two-tier extension architecture is significant: the first thirty-day extension is at the Joint Commissioner or Additional Commissioner level and the second thirty-day extension is at the Commissioner level, providing administrative gradation in the sufficient-cause review. Where the registered person genuinely needs more than the base ninety-day window, the procedural strategy is to file the extension application under the first proviso within the ninety-day window and chain it with a second-proviso application within the cumulative one-twenty-day window if needed.
Section 30(2) of the CGST Act mandates the procedural sequence the proper officer must follow on receipt of a Section 30(1) application. Sub-section (2) provides that the proper officer may, in such manner and within such period as may be prescribed, by an order, either revoke cancellation of the registration or reject the application. The first proviso to Section 30(2) imposes a natural-justice safeguard by requiring that the application for revocation shall not be rejected unless the applicant has been given an opportunity of being heard. The hearing requirement is operationalised through Form REG-23 which is the show cause notice the proper officer must issue before recording a rejection, and Form REG-24 which is the reply window given to the applicant. The combined REG-23 and REG-24 cycle ensures that no Section 30 application terminates in rejection without a documented opportunity to address the officer's concerns.
Section 30(1) of the CGST Act, as originally enacted, provided that any registered person whose registration is cancelled by the proper officer on his own motion may apply to such officer for revocation of cancellation of the registration in the prescribed manner within thirty days reckoned from when the cancellation order is served. The provision underwent material amendment through the Finance Act 2023 which extended the base window from thirty days to ninety days subject to such conditions and restrictions as may be prescribed. The amendment was notified through Notification 22/2023-Central Tax and brought into force on a date appointed by the central government. The base window of ninety days therefore now represents the standard statutory entitlement, with the earlier thirty-day version surviving only in the historical record. Practical commentary still occasionally refers to the thirty-day window, which is no longer the operative position.
Operationally the ninety-day window must accommodate several discrete tasks before REG-21 can be filed. The Rule 23(1) precondition requires that all returns due for the cancellation default period are filed first along with payment of tax, interest, penalty and late fee. The reconstruction of GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B for the default window typically takes between fifteen and thirty days depending on book quality and the length of the default period. The interest computation under Section 50 and late fee computation under Section 47 require head-wise tabulation. Practical milestone planning therefore allocates the first forty-five days to returns reconstruction and payment, the next fifteen days to REG-21 drafting and filing, and the residual thirty days as buffer for any REG-23 show cause notice that may be issued. Compressing the timeline below this allocation risks missed disclosures that translate into REG-23 queries.
Where the ninety-day window under Section 30(1) is allowed to lapse without filing REG-21 and without seeking an extension under the provisos, the substantive remedy of revocation is generally lost. The fallback options are limited: a fresh registration under Section 25 with a new Goods and Services Tax Identification Number, or an appeal against the cancellation order itself under Section 107 of the CGST Act within three months of the cancellation order. Fresh registration loses the credit-chain continuity. Section 107 appeal proceeds on the merits of the cancellation itself rather than the merits of revocation, and the appellate authority may direct restoration but the procedural path is longer than the Section 30 route. The risk of window-lapse therefore translates into either credit-ledger loss or extended litigation, both of which the Section 30 route is designed to avoid.
The ninety-day Section 30(1) window is conceptually shorter than the three-month appellate limitation under Section 107(1) of the CGST Act, but operationally they serve different remedial purposes. Section 30 is a return-filing-and-restoration route premised on the registered person accepting the underlying default and curing it; Section 107 is a merits-review route premised on contesting the cancellation itself. The comparative perspective matters when choosing the remedy: if the default is genuine and curable, Section 30 is the shorter and more reliable path; if the cancellation is itself contestable, for example where the consecutive-default count was wrongly computed or where the cancellation order is not a speaking order, Section 107 is the appropriate path even though it is procedurally longer. The two routes are not mutually exclusive; a registered person can pursue Section 30 first and reserve Section 107 as a fallback within its own limitation.
What Perungalathur clients usually ask next: Where Perungalathur differs: for the professional and salaried population of Perungalathur navigating personal-tax and home-office GST.
Common portal validation refers to the GSTN system-level checks that block submission of REG-21 unless every pending return is shown as filed and the Electronic Cash Ledger reflects the dues. The validation reduces officer-level rejection but increases pre-submission preparation work for the taxpayer.
The proviso to sub-rule (1) of Rule 23 is the operative precondition that bars acceptance of REG-21 unless every return due till the date of cancellation order has been furnished with tax, interest and late fee paid. It is the procedural choke point that drives revocation timelines.
Personal hearing is the procedural right granted under Section 75(4) of the CGST Act to be heard before any adverse order is passed. In revocation practice, the hearing on a REG-23 show-cause is the taxpayer's opportunity to address the officer's concerns directly before REG-05 rejection is passed.
Section 107 appeal is the statutory appellate remedy available against a REG-05 rejection of revocation, lying before the First Appellate Authority within three months extendable by one month. The appeal in Form APL-01 carries a ten per cent pre-deposit requirement under sub-section (6).
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.
Numerical examples showing tax + interest + penalty across common default scenarios.
How Perungalathur businesses typically avoid these: Where Perungalathur differs: the cluster of residential, retail, light manufacturing businesses that defines Perungalathur's commercial fabric. We see for the professional and salaried population of Perungalathur navigating personal-tax and home-office GST.
How the local trade mix shapes this — Across Perungalathur, the cluster of residential, retail, light manufacturing businesses that defines Perungalathur's commercial fabric.
Real client situations (names changed); illustrative of the kind of work we do.
Why these Perungalathur engagements look the way they do: Where Perungalathur differs: the business activity radiating outward from Perungalathur Railway Station and nearby commercial pockets. We see for the professional and salaried population of Perungalathur 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 Perungalathur clients. Call 9566-068-468 for specific queries.
From Anna Street, Bhavani Street, Cauvery Street, Gangai Street and Godhavari Street through to Kesavaraya Mudali Street, M.G.R. Street, Mahalakshmi Street and Perungalathur - Kolapakkam Road, our team covers GST Revocation for businesses right across Perungalathur and its main commercial roads.
Professional GST Revocation in Perungalathur, 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.