https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751503 The petitioner contested an impugned order under Section 85 of the Finance Act, 1994, which confirmed a tax demand. The HC acknowledged a slight delay in filing the Writ Petition due to late receipt of the order. Recognizing the alternative remedy available with the appellate Commissioner, the HC disposed of the petition, granting the petitioner 30 days to file a statutory appeal upon depositing 20% of the disputed tax. The appeal, if timely filed with the required deposit, will be adjudicated on merits by the Commissioner. The Deputy Commissioner of GST & Central Excise and the Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise were involved, and no costs were imposed. en-us Mon, 15 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 18 Apr 2024 08:26:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751503 The petitioner contested an impugned order under Section 85 of the Finance Act, 1994, which confirmed a tax demand. The HC acknowledged a slight delay in filing the Writ Petition due to late receipt of the order. Recognizing the alternative remedy available with the appellate Commissioner, the HC disposed of the petition, granting the petitioner 30 days to file a statutory appeal upon depositing 20% of the disputed tax. The appeal, if timely filed with the required deposit, will be adjudicated on merits by the Commissioner. The Deputy Commissioner of GST & Central Excise and the Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise were involved, and no costs were imposed. Case-Laws Service Tax Mon, 15 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751503