https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=380170 The High Court found that the State Tax Officer's actions were in contravention of the stay order granted by the first appellate authority. Despite the stay against coercive recovery, the State Tax Officer persisted with the restrictions, showing a lack of respect for the appellate authority's order. The Court quashed the impugned communication, revoked the instructions to RTO authorities, and lifted the attachment on the agricultural land. The petition was allowed, and costs were awarded to the petitioner. en-us Thu, 09 May 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 03 Sep 2019 13:15:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=380170 The High Court found that the State Tax Officer's actions were in contravention of the stay order granted by the first appellate authority. Despite the stay against coercive recovery, the State Tax Officer persisted with the restrictions, showing a lack of respect for the appellate authority's order. The Court quashed the impugned communication, revoked the instructions to RTO authorities, and lifted the attachment on the agricultural land. The petition was allowed, and costs were awarded to the petitioner. Case-Laws GST Thu, 09 May 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=380170