https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=405422 The court granted time for the State to file a counter affidavit and allowed the petitioner's counsel two weeks to respond. The respondents were directed to provide the orders passed in the proceedings, and the matter was scheduled for a hearing after five weeks. Both parties were instructed to submit written notes, relevant provisions of law, and decisions they intended to rely on before the next hearing date. The petitioner challenged the summary order under GST DRC-07, citing discrepancies in availed Input Tax Credit (ITC) and procedural violations of the JGST Act, 2017. en-us Mon, 15 Mar 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 19 Mar 2021 09:21:40 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=405422 The court granted time for the State to file a counter affidavit and allowed the petitioner's counsel two weeks to respond. The respondents were directed to provide the orders passed in the proceedings, and the matter was scheduled for a hearing after five weeks. Both parties were instructed to submit written notes, relevant provisions of law, and decisions they intended to rely on before the next hearing date. The petitioner challenged the summary order under GST DRC-07, citing discrepancies in availed Input Tax Credit (ITC) and procedural violations of the JGST Act, 2017. Case-Laws GST Mon, 15 Mar 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=405422