https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=424953 The HC set aside a demand notice for tax, interest, and penalty as premature because an appeal against the adjudication order rejecting the petitioner's refund claim was still pending. The refund claim had been rejected based on allegations of forged input tax credit. While acknowledging the petitioner could be liable if the adjudication order stands, the court held that the respondent must wait for the appeal outcome before initiating recovery proceedings under Section 75 of the Act. The court disposed of the writ petition accordingly, allowing the respondent to restart the process after appeal resolution. en-us Wed, 06 Jul 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 04 Apr 2025 11:28:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=424953 The HC set aside a demand notice for tax, interest, and penalty as premature because an appeal against the adjudication order rejecting the petitioner's refund claim was still pending. The refund claim had been rejected based on allegations of forged input tax credit. While acknowledging the petitioner could be liable if the adjudication order stands, the court held that the respondent must wait for the appeal outcome before initiating recovery proceedings under Section 75 of the Act. The court disposed of the writ petition accordingly, allowing the respondent to restart the process after appeal resolution. Case-Laws GST Wed, 06 Jul 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=424953