https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=758902 The appellant's claim that input tax credit was utilised under the settlement mechanism for payment of CGST, SGST and IGST, with tax ultimately flowing to the State on utilisation of credit for SGST/WBGST, was not specifically answered in the State's affidavit-in-opposition. The Court directed the State to obtain specific written instructions on those averments, permitted service of papers on the Additional Advocate General for Telangana because that State's stand was relevant, and allowed the private respondent to file an affidavit before the next date. No final adjudication was made, and the matter was kept pending for further affidavits. en-us Tue, 02 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 12 May 2025 11:59:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=758902 The appellant's claim that input tax credit was utilised under the settlement mechanism for payment of CGST, SGST and IGST, with tax ultimately flowing to the State on utilisation of credit for SGST/WBGST, was not specifically answered in the State's affidavit-in-opposition. The Court directed the State to obtain specific written instructions on those averments, permitted service of papers on the Additional Advocate General for Telangana because that State's stand was relevant, and allowed the private respondent to file an affidavit before the next date. No final adjudication was made, and the matter was kept pending for further affidavits. Case-Laws GST Tue, 02 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=758902