Interim protection against CGST Section 168A notifications stayed impugned orders and coercive recovery measures pending final hearing.

Challenges to notifications issued under Section 168A of the CGST Act questioned whether that provision authorises extension of the time limit for passing orders and whether the notifications were ultra vires Section 73(4). Following the approach taken in earlier connected matters, the Bombay High Court granted interim protection pending final disposal. The impugned order was stayed, and consequential coercive measures were also stayed or vacated, including blocking of the electronic credit ledger and any attachment, until final hearing.

---

---

Issues: Whether interim protection should be granted against the impugned order and consequential coercive measures in a challenge to notifications issued under Section 168A of the CGST Act.

Analysis: The petition assailed the notifications on the ground that there was no power under Section 168A to extend the time limit for passing orders and that the notifications were ultra vires Section 73(4) of the CGST Act. The Court followed the course adopted in earlier connected matters and granted interim protection pending final disposal.

Conclusion: The impugned order was stayed and the consequential coercive measures, including blocking of the electronic credit ledger and any attachment, were also stayed or vacated pending final hearing.

---