Qualified GST Revocation for Tiruninravur (PIN 602024) and adjacent Avadi — handled by a qualified, in-house team
Professional GST Revocation in Tiruninravur (PIN 602024), Chennai with on-time portal submission and full statutory reconciliation. Call 9566-068-468.
Notification 03/2023 dated 31-Mar-2023 provided a one-time amnesty allowing revocation applications for cancellation orders passed up to 31-Dec-2022, where the 90/180 day window had expired, by filing REG-21 by 30-Jun-2023 (later extended by Notification 24/2023 to 31-Aug-2023) on conditions of return filing and full tax payment.
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 Tiruninravur — qualified professionals, 15+ years experience, zero-penalty track record.
For Tiruninravur 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 Tiruninravur 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 Tiruninravur 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 Tiruninravur, the business activity radiating outward from Tiruninravur Railway Station and nearby commercial pockets. Practitioners note that with quick access via Tiruninravur Railway Station and feeder routes connecting Tiruninravur to the rest of Chennai.
Share documents via WhatsApp to 9566-068-468. No office visit required for Tiruninravur clients.
Miss any of these and the next consequence kicks in automatically.
Deadlines in this neighbourhood — Across Tiruninravur, the cluster of residential, small trade, education businesses that defines Tiruninravur's commercial fabric.
Deadline pressure points we see in Tiruninravur: Closer to Tiruninravur, for the professional and salaried population of Tiruninravur navigating personal-tax and home-office GST.
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 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 sourceSection 50 levies interest at eighteen per cent per annum on tax paid after the due date prescribed under Section 39. Sub-section (1) of Section 50 applies to all delayed cash payments, while the proviso, inserted with retrospective effect from 1 July 2017, limits the interest computation to the net cash liability (excluding ITC-discharged portion). Interest is a non-negotiable component of the dues that must be paid before REG-21 can be entertained, and unlike late fee it is not capped by any notification.
View sourceSection 29 is the gateway provision because revocation under Section 30 lies only against an order passed under Section 29(2). Sub-section (2) of Section 29 lists the suo motu grounds — contravention of prescribed provisions, non-filing of returns for the prescribed period, voluntary registration holder not commencing business within six months, registration obtained by fraud or wilful misstatement, or violation of Section 171 anti-profiteering. It is to be noted that the proper officer must afford an opportunity of being heard under the proviso before passing the cancellation order, failing which the order is itself amenable to challenge before revocation is even invoked.
View sourceClause (c) of sub-section (2) of Section 29 is the most common trigger for suo motu cancellation faced in revocation practice. It empowers cancellation where a registered person, other than a composition taxpayer, has not furnished returns for a continuous period of six months. For composition taxpayers, the threshold under clause (b) of the proviso is three consecutive tax periods. The revocation application must accompany all such pending returns filed up to the date of cancellation order.
View sourceRecords we prepare for Tiruninravur carry the geo-zone 602xx tag and coordinates 13.1342, 80.0264, which map each submission back to this locality. For GST Revocation at PIN 602024, understanding the Avadi Division's documentation norms removes most of the friction from the process. Tiruninravur (PIN 602024) falls under the Avadi Division of the Chennai West, the jurisdiction that handles statutory matters for businesses at this PIN. Businesses registered in Tiruninravur share the Chennai West jurisdiction, and their statutory matters route through the same Avadi Division each time.
Most commerce in Tiruninravur — invoices, expenses, purchases and statutory records — eventually surfaces in the GST Revocation working file we maintain for clients here. Working in Tiruninravur brings a logistical edge: proximity to Sevvapet Road and the Tiruninravur Railway Station corridor keeps physical document handling fast. The businesses clustered around Sevvapet Road in Tiruninravur drive the bulk of the GST Revocation workload we see each cycle. The suburban residential and small trade mix of Tiruninravur shapes what lands in our workpapers — a blend of education activity and the commercial pulse around Sevvapet Road.
The business mix in Tiruninravur centres on residential, and that sector carries its own GST Revocation quirks we plan for in advance. Sector concentration matters: when Tiruninravur leans toward residential, the GST Revocation risks cluster around the same few line items each cycle. GST Revocation for residential businesses in Tiruninravur hinges on getting the sector's recurring entries right the first time. The residential character of Tiruninravur commerce influences everything from invoice formats to the supporting documents a GST Revocation review needs.
The qualified-review step on every Tiruninravur GST Revocation file is where errors get caught before they reach the portal. Turnaround for Tiruninravur GST Revocation is deterministic — fixed fee, a scoped timeline, and a same-business-day acknowledgement once filed. Document intake for Tiruninravur clients runs over WhatsApp, so there is no office visit and no paper shuffle for a GST Revocation engagement. Fixed-fee scoping means a Tiruninravur business knows the GST Revocation cost up front, with no surprise additions mid-engagement.
From the same Tiruninravur team we also serve Poonamallee and other nearby localities without re-onboarding clients. We treat Tiruninravur and Poonamallee as one catchment for GST Revocation, which keeps documentation and turnaround consistent. Serving Tiruninravur and Poonamallee from one team keeps GST Revocation turnaround identical across the cluster. Coverage from Tiruninravur naturally extends to Poonamallee, so group entities across the area share one GST Revocation workflow.
Common patterns in the Avadi Division give Tiruninravur businesses an early-warning map we use to pre-empt GST Revocation issues. The longer we serve Tiruninravur, the more precisely we predict where a GST Revocation file needs attention. The GST Revocation mistakes we see most in Tiruninravur are avoidable with disciplined intake, which our checklist enforces. Recurring gaps in Tiruninravur small trade records are the first thing our GST Revocation review closes out.
For a new business incorporating in Tiruninravur or shifting its principal place of business here, GST Revocation setup is one of the first things to get right. Shifting principal place of business to Tiruninravur means updating jurisdiction to the Chennai West, and we manage the paperwork end-to-end. First-time GST Revocation for a Tiruninravur business is where getting the basics right saves years of cleanup later. New small trade ventures in Tiruninravur lean on us to stand up GST Revocation correctly before the first deadline rather than after a notice.
REG-21 revocation of suo motu cancelled GSTIN under Section 30 of the CGST Act for Tiruninravur businesses, filed within the 90/180 day statutory window with all pending returns cleared and tax dues paid.
A dedicated GST revocation consultant in Tiruninravur 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 Tiruninravur 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 Tiruninravur, 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.
Madras High Court orders have accepted medical emergencies, non-service of the cancellation order at the registered address, prolonged hospitalisation of the authorised signatory, succession on death of the proprietor, and natural calamities as sufficient cause within the meaning of the first proviso to Section 30(1).
Personal hearing is mandatory under Section 75(4) once expressly sought in the REG-24 reply. The Madras High Court in cases following Tapas Dutta v UoI has set aside revocation rejections passed without personal hearing where the right had been claimed in writing.
Yes. CBIC Instruction 04/2023-GST discourages retrospective cancellation absent specific grounds. A prayer in REG-21 for correction of the effective date to the date of the order is recognised practice and preserves recipient input tax credit for the disputed period.
Union of India v Bharti Airtel held that pre-GSTR-2B self-assessment rectification could not be claimed at the recipient's instance. The ruling does not preclude reconciliation evidence at the revocation stage where the proper officer himself is verifying past compliance position.
Suncraft Energy v Asst Commissioner of State Tax held that the recipient cannot be denied input tax credit on account of supplier default unless the department proceeds against the supplier first. The principle assists where supplier non-filing is raised as a collateral ground at the revocation stage.
Yes. CBIC Circular 122/41/2019-GST mandates a Document Identification Number on all communications. The Supreme Court guidance in Pradeep Goyal v UoI confirmed the requirement. Non-DIN orders are challengeable as non-est before the Madras High Court under Article 226.
What Tiruninravur clients want to know before signing: Closer to Tiruninravur, on the Avadi-Pattabiram corridor that passes through Tiruninravur.
Reading this guide locally — Across Tiruninravur, in the suburban residential and small-trade micro-market of Tiruninravur.
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.
Rule 21A of the CGST Rules provides for suspension of registration pending cancellation proceedings. Sub-rule (1) permits the registered person who has applied for cancellation under Section 29(1) to be treated as suspended from the date of the application or such other date as the proper officer may determine. Sub-rule (2) permits suo motu suspension by the proper officer where contravention is alleged, with effect from a date determined by the officer. Sub-rule (2A) provides for automatic suspension where significant differences or anomalies are noticed under the rule's framework. Suspension is a distinct status from cancellation: returns cannot be filed during suspension, but the registered person continues to be a registered person for ITC purposes. Where the cancellation that triggers Section 30 was preceded by a Rule 21A suspension, the precondition return-filing exercise may need to address the suspension period separately.
Rule 22(4) of the CGST Rules empowers the proper officer to drop the cancellation proceedings where the registered person's REG-18 reply is satisfactory and the underlying default has been cured. Where Rule 22(4) is invoked successfully, no REG-19 cancellation order is passed and Section 30 revocation is not needed at all. Practical guidance: where a REG-17 notice has been received, the registered person should treat the seven-working-day REG-18 reply window as a critical opportunity to cure the default and invoke Rule 22(4) to drop proceedings, rather than allowing REG-19 to be passed and then pursuing the longer Section 30 route. The two routes are sequential and the earlier Rule 22(4) route is operationally less expensive than the later Section 30 route.
Rule 22(3) of the CGST Rules permits the proper officer to determine the effective date of cancellation in the REG-19 order. The effective date is often the date from which the default crystallised (typically the date from which returns were not filed) rather than the date of the REG-19 order itself. This means the cancellation can operate retrospectively, affecting supplies made between the effective date and the REG-19 date. For Section 30 purposes, the retrospective effective date matters because the Rule 23(1) precondition requires all returns due to the date of cancellation to be filed — and the date of cancellation is the effective date determined in REG-19, not the REG-19 issuance date. The narrative reconstruction in the REG-21 must therefore align with the effective date for completeness.
Section 39 of the CGST Act is the source of the substantive obligation to furnish returns. Sub-section (1) of Section 39 requires every registered person, other than those specified categories, to furnish for every calendar month or part thereof a return of inward and outward supplies, input tax credit availed, tax payable, tax paid and such other particulars as may be prescribed. The return form prescribed is GSTR-3B for regular taxpayers. The Rule 23(1) precondition reference to all returns due refers to the Section 39 returns and the corresponding GSTR-1 outward-supply statements prescribed under Section 37. Understanding Section 39 as the substantive source helps practitioners articulate the precondition compliance correctly in the REG-21 narrative; the precondition is not merely a procedural ritual but a substantive cure of the underlying default.
Section 47 of the CGST Act prescribes late fee for late filing of returns. The base rate is one hundred rupees per day per return under CGST plus an equivalent amount under SGST, with a per-return ceiling tied to turnover under the Notification 04/2018-Central Tax framework as periodically updated. For NIL returns the rate is twenty-five rupees per day per return under CGST plus an equivalent under SGST under the lower-slab notifications. Notification 07/2023-Central Tax provides one-time relief for specific historical periods. The late fee computation for the cancellation-default window aggregates across all pending returns and is reflected in the electronic liability register before being discharged from the cash ledger. The computation working paper showing the per-return and aggregate late fee is a recommended annexure to REG-21.
Section 50 of the CGST Act prescribes interest at eighteen percent per annum on tax not paid by the due date, computed from the day succeeding the due date to the date of actual payment. The proviso inserted by Finance Act 2021 (retrospectively from 1 July 2017) clarifies that interest under Section 50(1) is payable only on the net tax liability after utilising the available input tax credit, except in cases of self-assessed tax declared in returns furnished after commencement of any proceedings under Sections 73 or 74. The Section 50 computation for the cancellation-default window is head-wise and date-specific; the working paper showing the computation by tax period and by tax head is annexed to REG-21. Errors in the Section 50 computation are a common REG-23 ground; the working paper precision is therefore important.
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.
Section 47 of the CGST Act has been the most iteratively amended provision in the late-fee architecture of GST. The original Section 47(1) provided for one hundred rupees per day per return capped at five thousand rupees for any GSTR-1, GSTR-3B and certain other returns. Section 47(2) extended the architecture to annual returns under Section 44 with a quarter-percent-of-turnover ceiling. The iteration history reflects the GST Council's repeated recognition that the original ceilings produced disproportionate outcomes for small taxpayers with long-default windows. Each iteration translated into a Central Tax notification — Notification 04/2018-Central Tax for the first wave of relief, Notification 76/2018 series for further relief, and so on through the periodic notifications.
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).
What Tiruninravur clients usually ask next: Closer to Tiruninravur, for the professional and salaried population of Tiruninravur navigating personal-tax and home-office GST.
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.
Frozen ITC ledger refers to the operational consequence of cancellation — the Electronic Credit Ledger of the cancelled GSTIN cannot be utilised to discharge any tax liability during the cancellation period. REG-22 revocation unfreezes the ledger subject to Section 16(4) limitations on availment.
Tax invoice bar is the consequence under Rule 21A and Section 29 that a cancelled or suspended GSTIN cannot issue tax invoices. Any invoice issued during cancellation carries no GST liability declaration and the recipient cannot claim ITC, exposing the taxpayer to Section 122 penalty as well.
Post-grant compliance refers to the immediate filing obligations after REG-22 revocation — GSTR-3B and GSTR-1 for the period between the date of cancellation and the date of restoration must be filed promptly to preserve continuity and avoid a fresh Section 29(2)(c) cancellation cycle.
Cancellation continuity period is the interval between the effective date of cancellation and the date of REG-22 restoration during which the taxpayer holds a frozen GSTIN. Returns for this period are still due under Section 39, although the portal often opens the filing window only after restoration.
Pre-deposit waiver in revocation appeals is the argument that since the cancellation order itself does not crystallise a tax demand, the ten per cent pre-deposit requirement under Section 107(6) operates only on disputed tax. Where the revocation rejection is purely procedural, the pre-deposit effectively reduces to zero.
Authorised signatory change is a procedural step often required during revocation where the original signatory is no longer available — handled through REG-14 amendment as part of, or immediately after, the revocation filing. The signatory issue is a common cause of REG-21 portal-submission failures.
Numerical examples showing tax + interest + penalty across common default scenarios.
How Tiruninravur businesses typically avoid these: Closer to Tiruninravur, the business activity radiating outward from Tiruninravur Railway Station and nearby commercial pockets, which is why for the professional and salaried population of Tiruninravur navigating personal-tax and home-office GST.
How the local trade mix shapes this — Across Tiruninravur, the business activity radiating outward from Tiruninravur Railway Station and nearby commercial pockets.
Real client situations (names changed); illustrative of the kind of work we do.
Why these Tiruninravur engagements look the way they do: Closer to Tiruninravur, the cluster of residential, small trade, education businesses that defines Tiruninravur's commercial fabric, which is why for the professional and salaried population of Tiruninravur 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 Tiruninravur clients. Call 9566-068-468 for specific queries.
Our GST Revocation clients in Tiruninravur are spread right across the locality — along 2nd Street, 3rd Street, 4th Street, 5th Street and 6th Street, and through the Chennai - Tiruttani - Renigunta Road, Korattur – Thinnanur – Periyapalayam Road, Nathamedu Road and Pakkam - Nathamedu Road business stretches — so wherever your premises sit, expert help is close by.
Professional GST Revocation in Tiruninravur, 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.