https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770112 Patna HC allowed the petitioner's application challenging recovery proceedings under CGST/BGST Act, 2017. The court found that recovery of Rs.50,75,214 from petitioner's bill was premature and violated statutory provisions, as authorities failed to wait the mandatory three-month period under Section 78 before initiating recovery under Section 79. The court noted that petitioner couldn't file second appeal due to non-constitution of the Tribunal. Authorities were directed to refund the recovered amount within two weeks, failing which 12% per annum interest would apply. The impugned orders were set aside considering retrospective amendment under Section 16(5). en-us Thu, 01 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 06 May 2025 09:58:53 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770112 Patna HC allowed the petitioner's application challenging recovery proceedings under CGST/BGST Act, 2017. The court found that recovery of Rs.50,75,214 from petitioner's bill was premature and violated statutory provisions, as authorities failed to wait the mandatory three-month period under Section 78 before initiating recovery under Section 79. The court noted that petitioner couldn't file second appeal due to non-constitution of the Tribunal. Authorities were directed to refund the recovered amount within two weeks, failing which 12% per annum interest would apply. The impugned orders were set aside considering retrospective amendment under Section 16(5). Case-Laws GST Thu, 01 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770112