Qualified GST Revocation for Arumbakkam (PIN 600106) and adjacent Koyambedu — handled by a qualified, in-house team
Professional GST Revocation in Arumbakkam (PIN 600106), Chennai — transparent scope, no surprises, and a filed acknowledgement back to you. 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 Arumbakkam — qualified professionals, 15+ years experience, zero-penalty track record.
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 Arumbakkam 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.
Cancellation order, pending invoices, bank statements and authorised signatory DSC details are shared via WhatsApp at 9566-068-468. Entire revocation handled remotely for Arumbakkam clients.
Our practice has handled registration restoration matters since the pre-GST era — service tax, VAT and excise registration restorations carried into GST suo motu cancellation revocations under Section 30. Deep institutional memory of jurisdictional officers.
Once REG-22 restores the GSTIN, we coordinate with your customers to ensure invoices for the cancellation period flow into their GSTR-2B and ITC is claimed within the Section 16(4) time bar — preserving customer relationships.
Every GST Revocation engagement delivers measurable, guaranteed outcomes — expert professionals, on time, every time.
Why this matters here — In Arumbakkam, the cluster of residential, retail, healthcare businesses that defines Arumbakkam's commercial fabric; served by short connections to Koyambedu and Aminjikarai and onward to central Chennai.
Share documents via WhatsApp to 9566-068-468. No office visit required for Arumbakkam clients.
Miss any of these and the next consequence kicks in automatically.
Deadlines in this neighbourhood — In Arumbakkam, the business activity radiating outward from Arumbakkam Metro and nearby commercial pockets.
Deadline pressure points we see in Arumbakkam: For Arumbakkam engagements specifically — for the professional and salaried population of Arumbakkam navigating personal-tax and home-office GST.
Monthly or quarterly statement of outward supplies; defaulted GSTR-1 filings up to date of cancellation are a precondition for REG-21
Annual return for composition taxpayers under Section 10; revocation by a composition taxpayer requires every defaulted GSTR-4 to be filed first
Cash challan used to deposit tax, interest, late fee and penalty into the Electronic Cash Ledger; balance is then debited against return filings preceding REG-21
Form for voluntary payments of tax or interest discovered during arrears reconciliation; used where the cause of cancellation involves under-declared liability
Appeal against the REG-05 order rejecting revocation, filed under Section 107 before the First Appellate Authority with the prescribed pre-deposit
Electronic application by a taxpayer for revocation of suo motu cancellation under Section 29(2); requires furnishing of all pending returns and payment of dues before submission is accepted by the common portal
Order passed by the proper officer revoking the suo motu cancellation and restoring the GSTIN; communicated electronically through the common portal
Notice issued by the proper officer where prima facie grounds exist to reject the REG-21 revocation application — typically incomplete returns, unpaid arrears, or insufficient reasoning for delay
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 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 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 sourceSection 47 prescribes the late fee payable for delayed furnishing of returns under Section 39 read with Section 37. Sub-section (1) of Section 47 imposes a late fee of two hundred rupees per day (one hundred CGST and one hundred SGST) subject to a maximum of five thousand rupees per return. It is to be noted that the late fee is payable for every pending return that the taxpayer files as a precondition for the revocation application, and Notification 07/2023-Central Tax provides a specific cap for revocation cases where returns relate to financial years up to 2021-22.
View sourceClause (b) of sub-section (2) of Section 29 empowers the proper officer to cancel the registration of a person who has taken voluntary registration under Section 25(3) but has not commenced business within six months from the date of registration. Revocation in such cases requires the taxpayer to demonstrate, in the REG-21 application, that business has commenced — through invoices issued, GSTR-1 filed, bank statements showing business receipts, or commercial agreements executed.
View sourceArumbakkam is a north Chennai residential commercial mix anchored by the Arumbakkam Metro and the MMM Hospital with supporting retail and IT services. Approvals, acknowledgements and queries for Arumbakkam businesses tie back to the Anna Nagar Division, so our GST Revocation cadence accounts for how that office works. Businesses registered in Arumbakkam share the Chennai North jurisdiction, and their statutory matters route through the same Anna Nagar Division each time. We keep a cycle-by-cycle record of how the Anna Nagar Division of the Chennai North handles Arumbakkam filings and approvals.
Arumbakkam sustains a medium flow of commerce for a residential commercial mix locality, and that flow is the raw material for the GST Revocation files we close here. Vendors and customers tied to the Arumbakkam Metro network show up across the invoice trail we reconcile for Arumbakkam GST Revocation clients. The businesses clustered around MMM Hospital in Arumbakkam drive the bulk of the GST Revocation workload we see each cycle. Working in Arumbakkam brings a logistical edge: proximity to MMM Hospital and the Arumbakkam Metro corridor keeps physical document handling fast.
residential units around Arumbakkam share recurring GST Revocation patterns — input-credit timing, vendor reconciliation, and sector-specific documentation. Because Arumbakkam hosts a cluster of residential businesses, we benchmark each new GST Revocation engagement against patterns we already track for the locality. Sector concentration matters: when Arumbakkam leans toward residential, the GST Revocation risks cluster around the same few line items each cycle. A residential operator in Arumbakkam gets a GST Revocation workflow shaped by sector norms, not a one-size-fits-all template.
Every GST Revocation file we open for Arumbakkam is reconciled, reviewed by a qualified practitioner, and archived for seven years. The qualified-review step on every Arumbakkam GST Revocation file is where errors get caught before they reach the portal. The Arumbakkam GST Revocation workflow is documented end-to-end: WhatsApp document intake, a working file, qualified review, and a filed acknowledgement back to you. A Arumbakkam client sees the same GST Revocation cadence each cycle: intake, reconciliation, review, filing, acknowledgement.
GST Revocation clients in Virugambakkam are handled by the same practitioners who run our Arumbakkam desk. Serving Arumbakkam and Virugambakkam from one team keeps GST Revocation turnaround identical across the cluster. Businesses straddling Arumbakkam and Virugambakkam get a single GST Revocation point of contact rather than two. Proximity to Virugambakkam means a Arumbakkam engagement can extend across the locality cluster with no change in cadence.
Common patterns in the Anna Nagar Division give Arumbakkam businesses an early-warning map we use to pre-empt GST Revocation issues. Patterns we track for Arumbakkam include it services documentation gaps, timing mismatches, and the questions the Anna Nagar Division tends to raise. Each engagement in Arumbakkam adds to a record of what the Chennai North jurisdiction expects, sharpening the next GST Revocation file. Because we work repeatedly across Arumbakkam, we can benchmark a new client's GST Revocation position against the locality norm.
Incorporating in Arumbakkam comes with jurisdiction, registration and GST Revocation steps that we sequence so nothing stalls the launch. A startup setting up near MMM Hospital in Arumbakkam gets a GST Revocation foundation built for the Anna Nagar Division from day one. When a Aminjikarai business expands into Arumbakkam, we extend its GST Revocation setup to PIN 600106 without disruption. First-time GST Revocation for a Arumbakkam 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 Arumbakkam businesses, filed within the 90/180 day statutory window with all pending returns cleared and tax dues paid.
A dedicated GST revocation consultant in Arumbakkam 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 Arumbakkam 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 Arumbakkam, 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.
Yes. On issue of REG-22, the credit ledger and cash ledger balances stand restored. Input tax credit accumulated up to the effective date of cancellation becomes available for set-off in the next GSTR-3B filed under the restored GSTIN.
Yes. Once REG-22 is passed, the registered person may issue revised invoices under Section 31(3)(a) of the CGST Act read with Rule 53 for the period from the effective date of cancellation to the date of restoration, preserving the recipient's input tax credit.
Invoices issued under a cancelled GSTIN are treated as supplies by an unregistered person. The recipient is denied input tax credit, and the supplier faces penalty exposure under Section 122(1)(i) of up to the higher of ten thousand rupees or the tax evaded.
No. The common portal blocks e-way bill generation for a cancelled GSTIN. Movement of goods during the cancelled period exposes the consignment to detention under Section 129 of the CGST Act, with penalty up to the tax on the consignment.
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.
What Arumbakkam clients want to know before signing: For Arumbakkam engagements specifically — around the Arumbakkam Metro catchment of Arumbakkam.
Reading this guide locally — In Arumbakkam, in the residential commercial mix micro-market of Arumbakkam.
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.
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.
The ninety-day window under Section 30(1) runs from the day Form REG-19 is served on the registered person. Date of service is governed by Section 169 of the CGST Act which prescribes alternate modes including giving or tendering it directly, registered post or speed post with acknowledgement, communication through the email address provided at the time of registration, making it available on the common portal, publication in a newspaper, or affixing it in some conspicuous place. The most common mode for cancellation orders is portal-availability under Section 169(1)(d), with the date of service deemed to be the date on which the order is uploaded to the registered person's dashboard. The General Clauses Act 1897 principles on computation of period apply: the date of service is excluded from the count and the period ends at the close of the ninetieth day.
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.
An extension granted under the first proviso enlarges only the procedural window within which REG-21 must be filed; it does not relax the substantive Rule 23(1) preconditions. All returns due for the default period must still be filed, all tax and interest must still be paid, all late fee must still be discharged before REG-21 can be entertained. The practical implication is that the extension is most useful when the returns reconstruction itself is the bottleneck; once the returns are filed and the dues paid, the actual REG-21 filing is a relatively quick step that does not need the extra time. Strategic use of the extension therefore involves filing the extension application early in the original ninety-day window when it becomes apparent that the returns reconstruction will overrun, rather than waiting until the eighty-fifth day.
The documentation discipline for a first-proviso extension application has four elements that consistently survive review. First, a chronological narrative tying the cancellation date in REG-19 to the sufficient-cause event with specific dates. Second, supporting documents directly evidencing the cause: medical records for hospitalisation, FIR for theft of records, notification or government advisory for force-majeure. Third, an estimated timeline for completion of the residual tasks. Fourth, an undertaking to file REG-21 within the extended window. Where these four elements are present, the extension order is typically issued within fifteen working days. Where any element is missing, the application is more likely to receive a deficiency query under Rule 90(3) read with the procedural framework, extending the timeline materially. Documentation discipline at the application stage is therefore the highest-leverage practitioner contribution.
The first-proviso extension under Section 30(1) is sought through a formal application to the Additional Commissioner or Joint Commissioner having jurisdiction, accompanied by documentary evidence of the sufficient cause being relied on. The application is filed on the common portal in the prescribed format read with the jurisdictional commissionerate's standing instructions. The application must be filed within the original ninety-day window; an application filed after the ninetieth day generally does not meet the statutory requirement of being within the said period. The Additional Commissioner or Joint Commissioner records reasons in writing while granting or refusing the extension, and the order is uploaded to the registered person's dashboard. The Section 30(1) extension architecture sits within the broader CGST procedural framework, and the recorded reasons facilitate downstream review if the extension is refused.
The second-proviso extension is sought by filing a fresh application addressed to the Commissioner having jurisdiction, within the cumulative one-twenty-day window. The application chains with the first-proviso order: the chronological narrative now extends from the original cancellation date through the first-proviso event and onward through the second-proviso event. The Commissioner records reasons in writing while granting or refusing the further extension. The cumulative cap stands at one hundred and fifty days computed from the REG-19 service date, beyond which Section 30 cannot be invoked further. The chaining requires careful date-tracking because an application filed on the one-twenty-first day technically falls outside the statutory framework even if the underlying cause genuinely persists.
Where even the second-proviso extension is refused or where the cumulative one-fifty-day cap is exceeded, the boundary with the Section 107 appellate route becomes operationally relevant. The proviso route is exhausted at one hundred and fifty days; thereafter the only statutory remedy is appeal under Section 107(1) within three months of the original cancellation order (or rejection order if applicable). The boundary is conceptually clean: provisos enlarge the Section 30 window, appeal opens a separate merits-review track. Practitioner judgement on when to switch tracks turns on the strength of the merits review: where the underlying cancellation is contestable on speaking-order grounds or on misapplication of Section 29(2), Section 107 is the better track even at the proviso-extension stage rather than after exhaustion.
Strategically the cumulative one-fifty-day window should be planned at the cancellation stage rather than utilised reactively. Practitioners assessing the REG-19 cancellation order against the registered person's books make an early determination on whether the ninety-day base window is sufficient. Where the books are clean and the default period is short, the base window suffices and the provisos are unused. Where the books are disrupted or the default period is long, both proviso extensions are budgeted from day one and the application sequence is initiated proactively. The strategic approach reduces last-minute rushes and aligns documentation discipline with the relevant proviso threshold. Where neither proviso is needed, the registered person is in a stronger procedural posture for the actual REG-21 review.
What Arumbakkam clients usually ask next: For Arumbakkam engagements specifically — for the professional and salaried population of Arumbakkam navigating personal-tax and home-office GST.
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.
Sufficient cause is the standard of explanation required for the Commissioner to exercise the 180-day extension power under the Section 30 proviso. Madras High Court has held that the standard is liberal — illness, lockdown impact, audit complications and credential lockouts have all been accepted.
Self-cancellation withdrawal is the route where a taxpayer who voluntarily cancelled the registration under Section 29(1) seeks to undo that cancellation. It is procedurally distinct from Section 30 revocation — voluntary cancellation is not amenable to revocation and the route is fresh registration in REG-01.
Retrospective cancellation is cancellation with effect from a date earlier than the date of the order, permitted under the proviso to Section 29(2) typically in fraud or non-existent business cases. Revocation against retrospective cancellation has to address both the merits and the retrospective effect.
DRC-03 voluntary payment is used during revocation preparation where the cause of cancellation involves under-declared liability discovered during arrears reconciliation. Filing DRC-03 alongside REG-21 strengthens the bona fides of the revocation application and may shorten officer-side scrutiny.
Show-cause hearing is the personal-hearing opportunity on a REG-23 notice; failure of the proper officer to grant a hearing despite request renders the REG-05 rejection vulnerable to challenge on the Section 75(4) procedural-fairness ground in appeal or writ.
GSTR-9 backlog refers to annual returns under Section 44 that may be pending for periods preceding the cancellation. The portal requires the annual return to be filed for completed financial years before REG-21 is accepted, in addition to all monthly and quarterly returns.
Reconciliation packet is the working file maintained during revocation preparation — period-wise summary of outward supplies from books, ITC from GSTR-2B, cash payments from challans, and late-fee computation. The packet supports both return-filing accuracy and the REG-21 narrative.
Portal access restoration is the practical step of regaining login credentials on the common portal when the original signatory or business owner has lost access. It frequently involves PAN-Aadhaar based credential reset and is a precondition to filing the defaulted returns that revocation requires.
Effective date of revocation is the date from which REG-22 restores the GSTIN — generally specified as the date of the cancellation order itself, ensuring statutory continuity. The taxpayer is then required to file returns for the intervening period within thirty days of restoration.
Numerical examples showing tax + interest + penalty across common default scenarios.
How Arumbakkam businesses typically avoid these: For Arumbakkam engagements specifically — the cluster of residential, retail, healthcare businesses that defines Arumbakkam's commercial fabric; for the professional and salaried population of Arumbakkam navigating personal-tax and home-office GST.
How the local trade mix shapes this — In Arumbakkam, the cluster of residential, retail, healthcare businesses that defines Arumbakkam's commercial fabric.
Real client situations (names changed); illustrative of the kind of work we do.
Why these Arumbakkam engagements look the way they do: For Arumbakkam engagements specifically — the business activity radiating outward from Arumbakkam Metro and nearby commercial pockets; for the professional and salaried population of Arumbakkam 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 Arumbakkam clients. Call 9566-068-468 for specific queries.
From 4th Avenue (Santhi Colony Road), 5th Avenue, 6th Main Road, 7th Main Road and EVR Periyar Salai through to Jawaharlal Nehru Road (100 Feet Road), Koyambedu Bridge, MTC Busway and 2nd Avenue, Anna Nagar West, our team covers GST Revocation for businesses right across Arumbakkam and its main commercial roads.
Professional GST Revocation in Arumbakkam, 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.