https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764144 A writ petition challenging a notice proposing recovery of excess input tax credit was not entertained on merits, as the court considered it appropriate to let the tax authority decide the matter first after considering the petitioner's response and alleged detailed representation. Although the petitioner had not replied within the stipulated period, the record indicated that the expected reply was reflected in the notice itself. The petition was disposed of with a direction to the concerned authority to pass a final order after examining the representation and the response already on record. en-us Wed, 30 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 03 Jan 2025 08:45:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764144 A writ petition challenging a notice proposing recovery of excess input tax credit was not entertained on merits, as the court considered it appropriate to let the tax authority decide the matter first after considering the petitioner's response and alleged detailed representation. Although the petitioner had not replied within the stipulated period, the record indicated that the expected reply was reflected in the notice itself. The petition was disposed of with a direction to the concerned authority to pass a final order after examining the representation and the response already on record. Case-Laws GST Wed, 30 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764144