https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311134 Interim protection against coercive recovery was warranted while the challenge to Rule 96(10)(b) remained pending, because similar petitioners had already been granted interim relief and the impugned payment demand arose during pendency of the main petition. The Court allowed the adjudication proceedings to continue, but held that coercive recovery should not proceed at this stage. On that basis, interim relief against recovery was granted in favour of the petitioner pending determination of the constitutional challenge and connected proceedings. en-us Thu, 06 Apr 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 16 Apr 2025 11:38:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311134 Interim protection against coercive recovery was warranted while the challenge to Rule 96(10)(b) remained pending, because similar petitioners had already been granted interim relief and the impugned payment demand arose during pendency of the main petition. The Court allowed the adjudication proceedings to continue, but held that coercive recovery should not proceed at this stage. On that basis, interim relief against recovery was granted in favour of the petitioner pending determination of the constitutional challenge and connected proceedings. Case-Laws GST Thu, 06 Apr 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311134