https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=436181 HC held that the amount deposited by the petitioner during search proceedings was not a voluntary payment under s.74(5) of the GST Act and lacked authority of law as mandated by Art. 265 of the Constitution. Absence of a proper receipt and statutory basis rendered the collection unconstitutional, infringing the petitioner's property right under Art. 300A. The departmental contention that the amount be retained subject to investigation was rejected. HC partly allowed the writ petition and directed respondent-authority to refund Rs. 1,99,90,000/- to the petitioner with interest at 6% per annum. en-us Tue, 14 Mar 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 15 Dec 2025 14:17:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=436181 HC held that the amount deposited by the petitioner during search proceedings was not a voluntary payment under s.74(5) of the GST Act and lacked authority of law as mandated by Art. 265 of the Constitution. Absence of a proper receipt and statutory basis rendered the collection unconstitutional, infringing the petitioner's property right under Art. 300A. The departmental contention that the amount be retained subject to investigation was rejected. HC partly allowed the writ petition and directed respondent-authority to refund Rs. 1,99,90,000/- to the petitioner with interest at 6% per annum. Case-Laws GST Tue, 14 Mar 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=436181