https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=78605 The High Court restored the petitioner's appeal due to a delay in filing. The appeal was filed before the second respondent, 14 days after the limitation expired. The court held that despite the marginal delay, the impugned order was set aside. The matter was remitted back to the Appellate Commissioner for disposal on merits and in accordance with the law, with the condition that the petitioner deposit an additional 20% of the disputed tax u/s 107 of the respective GST enactments. The impugned order was quashed, and the third respondent was directed to instruct the Tamil Nad Mercantile Bank Ltd. to unfreeze the petitioner's account after deducting 20% as pre-deposit. The petition was allowed. en-us Tue, 18 Jun 2024 12:13:52 +0530 Tue, 18 Jun 2024 12:13:52 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=78605 The High Court restored the petitioner's appeal due to a delay in filing. The appeal was filed before the second respondent, 14 days after the limitation expired. The court held that despite the marginal delay, the impugned order was set aside. The matter was remitted back to the Appellate Commissioner for disposal on merits and in accordance with the law, with the condition that the petitioner deposit an additional 20% of the disputed tax u/s 107 of the respective GST enactments. The impugned order was quashed, and the third respondent was directed to instruct the Tamil Nad Mercantile Bank Ltd. to unfreeze the petitioner's account after deducting 20% as pre-deposit. The petition was allowed. Highlights GST Tue, 18 Jun 2024 12:13:52 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=78605