https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=442650 Recovery during pendency of a second appeal under the BGST/CGST regime was examined in light of the statutory pre-deposit and automatic stay mechanism. The HC held that once the assessee had paid the amounts contemplated for appeal-10% at the first appellate stage and a further 20% under s.112 for approaching the Appellate Tribunal-s.112(8) mandated stay of further recovery, and the Assessing Authority lacked jurisdiction to recover the entire demand; the impugned recovery was characterised as arbitrary and contrary to rule of law. Consequently, the excess amount recovered beyond the statutory pre-deposit was directed to be refunded within two weeks with 12% p.a. interest on default, costs were imposed on the erring officer, and the writ was allowed. en-us Wed, 23 Aug 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 09 Jan 2026 14:38:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=442650 Recovery during pendency of a second appeal under the BGST/CGST regime was examined in light of the statutory pre-deposit and automatic stay mechanism. The HC held that once the assessee had paid the amounts contemplated for appeal-10% at the first appellate stage and a further 20% under s.112 for approaching the Appellate Tribunal-s.112(8) mandated stay of further recovery, and the Assessing Authority lacked jurisdiction to recover the entire demand; the impugned recovery was characterised as arbitrary and contrary to rule of law. Consequently, the excess amount recovered beyond the statutory pre-deposit was directed to be refunded within two weeks with 12% p.a. interest on default, costs were imposed on the erring officer, and the writ was allowed. Case-Laws GST Wed, 23 Aug 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=442650