https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=434614 HC allowed the writ petition, holding that the tax authorities had misread the petitioner's GSTR-9 for FY 2017-18. It was undisputed that only one GSTR-9, dated 30.01.2020, had been filed and its figures, including GST deposited in June 2018 (FY 2018-19) towards FY 2017-18 liability, were correct. The assessing and appellate authorities erroneously ignored that payment and thereby passed unsustainable orders. Setting aside both impugned orders, HC directed the respondents to adjust the GST amount already deposited by the petitioner against the relevant period's tax liability, thereby granting full relief to the petitioner. en-us Thu, 23 Feb 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 15 Dec 2025 14:36:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=434614 HC allowed the writ petition, holding that the tax authorities had misread the petitioner's GSTR-9 for FY 2017-18. It was undisputed that only one GSTR-9, dated 30.01.2020, had been filed and its figures, including GST deposited in June 2018 (FY 2018-19) towards FY 2017-18 liability, were correct. The assessing and appellate authorities erroneously ignored that payment and thereby passed unsustainable orders. Setting aside both impugned orders, HC directed the respondents to adjust the GST amount already deposited by the petitioner against the relevant period's tax liability, thereby granting full relief to the petitioner. Case-Laws GST Thu, 23 Feb 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=434614