https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=284079 Challenge to Section 174 of the KSGST Act was rejected as the issue had already been decided against the petitioners in an earlier judgment, and the Court applied that ratio without re-examining the merits. The contention that the demand was barred by limitation under Section 25(1) of the KVAT Act was also held to be covered by the same precedent and was negatived on that basis. The writ petitions were dismissed on both grounds, with no separate adjudication of the contested points in the present proceedings. en-us Fri, 11 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 05 Mar 2025 18:09:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=284079 Challenge to Section 174 of the KSGST Act was rejected as the issue had already been decided against the petitioners in an earlier judgment, and the Court applied that ratio without re-examining the merits. The contention that the demand was barred by limitation under Section 25(1) of the KVAT Act was also held to be covered by the same precedent and was negatived on that basis. The writ petitions were dismissed on both grounds, with no separate adjudication of the contested points in the present proceedings. Case-Laws GST Fri, 11 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=284079