TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tax Notifications Challenged: Petitioner Secures Interim Relief with 20% Payment and Stay Order on Enforcement</h1> The Bombay HC issued Rule and interim relief in a GST-related challenge, finding a strong prima facie case against two tax notifications. The court stayed ... Challenge to N/N. 56/2023-Central Tax dated 28th December, 2023 and N/N. 56 of 2023 dated 16th January, 2024 issued by Respondent No. 1 - HELD THAT:- In Writ Petition No. 5146 of 2024 as well as Writ Petition No. 2616 of 2025, this Court has issued Rule and granted interim relief to the Petitioners in both these Writ Petitions on the prima facie ground these Notifications could not have been issued without the recommendation of the GST Council. Considering these facts, in the present case also similar reliefs ought to be granted to the Petitioner. In these circumstances, Rule issued. A Strong prima facie case is made out for granting interim relief to the Petitioner - Petition allowed. In the case before the Bombay High Court, the Petitioner, represented by Adv. G. Shivdass and others, challenged two notifications: Notification No. 56/2023-Central Tax dated 28th December 2023, and Notification No. 56 of 2023 dated 16th January 2024, as well as an order dated 29th April 2024 issued by Respondent No. 2. The Petitioner argued that similar notifications have been contested in other writ petitions, where the court has issued Rule and granted interim relief on the grounds that the notifications were issued without the GST Council's recommendation.The Court, comprising Justices B.P. Colabawalla and Firdosh P. Pooniwalla, found merit in the Petitioner's arguments, noting that a 'strong prima facie case' was established. Consequently, the Court issued Rule and granted interim relief, staying the operation of the impugned order and restraining the Respondents from enforcing it until the final disposal of the petition. The Court also noted that the Petitioner had already paid 20% of the tax under protest, which will remain as a deposit pending the outcome of the writ petition. The case was tagged with related writ petitions for further proceedings. The order is to be digitally signed and communicated via fax or email.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
