Qualified GST Revocation for Tharamani (PIN 600113) and adjacent Tidel Park — backed by a 15+ year track record
Professional GST Revocation in Tharamani (PIN 600113), Chennai — transparent scope, no surprises, and a filed acknowledgement back to you. Call 9566-068-468.
Section 122(1)(xi) levies penalty of ₹10,000 or amount of tax involved, whichever is higher, for supply without registration or after cancellation. Section 122(2) provides for an additional general penalty of ₹25,000. Where fraud is alleged, Section 74 applies with 100% penalty plus interest.
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 Tharamani — qualified professionals, 15+ years experience, zero-penalty track record.
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 Tharamani 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 Tharamani 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.
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.
Every GST Revocation engagement delivers measurable, guaranteed outcomes — expert professionals, on time, every time.
Why this matters here — In Tharamani, the cluster of it services, r&d, education businesses that defines Tharamani's commercial fabric; served by short connections to Tidel Park and Kotturpuram and onward to central Chennai.
Share documents via WhatsApp to 9566-068-468. No office visit required for Tharamani clients.
Miss any of these and the next consequence kicks in automatically.
Deadlines in this neighbourhood — In Tharamani, the business activity radiating outward from IIT Madras Research Park and nearby commercial pockets.
Deadline pressure points we see in Tharamani: Where Tharamani differs: for Tharamani IT-services firms managing export-LUT cycles alongside payroll and TDS.
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
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
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 sourceRule 22 prescribes the procedure preceding suo motu cancellation under Section 29(2). Sub-rule (1) requires issuance of show-cause in Form REG-17, reply in Form REG-18 within seven working days, and order of cancellation in Form REG-19 within thirty days of reply. Sub-rule (4) is critical for revocation practice — if the taxpayer files all pending returns and pays the dues during the pendency of cancellation proceedings, the officer may drop the proceedings by passing an order in Form REG-20, obviating the need for revocation under Section 30 altogether.
View sourceRule 21A provides for suspension of registration during the pendency of cancellation proceedings under Section 29. Sub-rule (1) permits the proper officer to suspend a registration where he has reasons to believe the registration is liable to be cancelled. A suspended GSTIN cannot issue tax invoices or pass on ITC. Revocation under Section 30 is the route to lift not just the cancellation but also any preceding suspension flag on the portal that may persist.
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 sourceTharamani is the gravitational anchor of Chennai's IT and R&D ecosystem home to IIT Madras Research Park MGR Film City and CSIR-CLRI. Every Tharamani engagement we open begins with the basics: PIN 600113, the Velachery Division, and the coordinates 12.9842, 80.2461 that anchor the locality. For GST Revocation at PIN 600113, understanding the Velachery Division's documentation norms removes most of the friction from the process. Tharamani (PIN 600113) falls under the Velachery Division of the Chennai South, the jurisdiction that handles statutory matters for businesses at this PIN.
Tharamani reads as a it corridor anchor with research institutions pocket with high commercial activity, anchored around MGR Film City and fed by the Tharamani Bus Stop corridor. Vendors and customers tied to the Tharamani Bus Stop network show up across the invoice trail we reconcile for Tharamani GST Revocation clients. The it corridor anchor with research institutions mix of Tharamani shapes what lands in our workpapers — a blend of residential activity and the commercial pulse around MGR Film City. Most commerce in Tharamani — invoices, expenses, purchases and statutory records — eventually surfaces in the GST Revocation working file we maintain for clients here.
it services units around Tharamani share recurring GST Revocation patterns — input-credit timing, vendor reconciliation, and sector-specific documentation. Sector concentration matters: when Tharamani leans toward it services, the GST Revocation risks cluster around the same few line items each cycle. A it services operator in Tharamani gets a GST Revocation workflow shaped by sector norms, not a one-size-fits-all template. For a it services business in Tharamani, the GST Revocation scope is rarely generic; we tailor the checklist to how that sector actually transacts.
The Tharamani GST Revocation workflow is documented end-to-end: WhatsApp document intake, a working file, qualified review, and a filed acknowledgement back to you. Every GST Revocation file we open for Tharamani is reconciled, reviewed by a qualified practitioner, and archived for seven years. Our Tharamani GST Revocation process is built to be predictable, documented, and on time, cycle after cycle. Turnaround for Tharamani GST Revocation is deterministic — fixed fee, a scoped timeline, and a same-business-day acknowledgement once filed.
Businesses straddling Tharamani and Perungudi get a single GST Revocation point of contact rather than two. From the same Tharamani team we also serve Perungudi and other nearby localities without re-onboarding clients. GST Revocation clients in Perungudi are handled by the same practitioners who run our Tharamani desk. A client relocating between Tharamani and Perungudi keeps the same GST Revocation file and the same team.
Each engagement in Tharamani adds to a record of what the Chennai South jurisdiction expects, sharpening the next GST Revocation file. Patterns we track for Tharamani include residential documentation gaps, timing mismatches, and the questions the Velachery Division tends to raise. Sector signals in Tharamani — seasonal residential swings and peak-period volumes — shape how we schedule GST Revocation work. Recurring gaps in Tharamani residential records are the first thing our GST Revocation review closes out.
When a Kotturpuram business expands into Tharamani, we extend its GST Revocation setup to PIN 600113 without disruption. We onboard new Tharamani entities onto a GST Revocation cadence that is audit-ready from the very first cycle. Relocating a registered office into Tharamani (PIN 600113) changes the assessing division, and we handle that GST Revocation transition cleanly. First-time GST Revocation for a Tharamani business is where getting the basics right saves years of cleanup later.
REG-21 revocation of suo motu cancelled GSTIN under Section 30 of the CGST Act for Tharamani businesses, filed within the 90/180 day statutory window with all pending returns cleared and tax dues paid.
A dedicated GST revocation consultant in Tharamani 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 Tharamani 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 Tharamani, 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.
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.
Yes. Section 122(1)(i) prescribes penalty of the higher of ten thousand rupees or tax evaded for supplies under a cancelled GSTIN. Revocation does not erase the period-specific exposure unless revised invoices under Section 31(3)(a) are issued post REG-22.
What Tharamani clients want to know before signing: Where Tharamani differs: in the it corridor anchor with research institutions micro-market of Tharamani.
Reading this guide locally — In Tharamani, in the it corridor anchor with research institutions micro-market of Tharamani.
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 Tharamani clients usually ask next: Where Tharamani differs: for Tharamani IT-services firms managing export-LUT cycles alongside payroll and TDS.
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.
REG-24 is the taxpayer's reply to a REG-23 show-cause, carrying clarifications, documentary proof of return-filing, payment challans, and submissions on reasonable cause. It must be filed within seven working days of REG-23 to avoid REG-05 rejection.
The Section 30 window is the 90-day period commencing from the date of service of the cancellation order under Section 29(2) within which the revocation application in REG-21 must ordinarily be filed. The Commissioner can extend this by a further 180 days, giving an outer 270-day limit.
Commissioner extension refers to the discretionary power, under the first proviso to Section 30(1) as substituted by the Finance Act 2023, to extend the 90-day revocation window by a further period not exceeding 180 days. The extension is not automatic and requires a reasoned application showing sufficient cause.
Joint Commissioner extension was the first-tier extension power under the pre-Finance Act 2023 proviso to Section 30(1), allowing 60 days beyond the original 90-day window. It has been subsumed into the consolidated 180-day Commissioner power with effect from 1 October 2023 and is now of historical interest only.
Numerical examples showing tax + interest + penalty across common default scenarios.
How Tharamani businesses typically avoid these: Where Tharamani differs: the cluster of it services, r&d, education businesses that defines Tharamani's commercial fabric. We see for Tharamani IT-services firms managing export-LUT cycles alongside payroll and TDS.
How the local trade mix shapes this — In Tharamani, the cluster of it services, r&d, education businesses that defines Tharamani's commercial fabric.
Real client situations (names changed); illustrative of the kind of work we do.
Why these Tharamani engagements look the way they do: Where Tharamani differs: the business activity radiating outward from IIT Madras Research Park and nearby commercial pockets. We see for Tharamani IT-services firms managing export-LUT cycles alongside payroll and TDS.
“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 Tharamani clients. Call 9566-068-468 for specific queries.
From Dr MGR Main Road, Dr. Muthulakshmi Road, Kalki Krishnamurty Road, Lattice Bridge and Old Mahapalipuram Road through to Rajiv Gandhi IT Expressway, Rajiv Gandhi Salai, Taramani Link Road and Thiruvalluvar Road, our team covers GST Revocation for businesses right across Tharamani and its main commercial roads.
Professional GST Revocation in Tharamani, 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.