https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773390 A demand for FY 2017-18 raised under Section 74 of the CGST Act, premised on the levy under Section 50 and the retrospective amendment in Section 112 of the Finance Act, 2021, was held unsustainable because the same factual matrix was already covered by an earlier decision of the Orissa HC. The departmental representative accepted that the earlier ruling applied, and the adjudication order was therefore set aside. The matter was remitted to the GST authority for reconsideration in accordance with that binding decision. en-us Wed, 18 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 21 Jun 2025 08:28:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773390 A demand for FY 2017-18 raised under Section 74 of the CGST Act, premised on the levy under Section 50 and the retrospective amendment in Section 112 of the Finance Act, 2021, was held unsustainable because the same factual matrix was already covered by an earlier decision of the Orissa HC. The departmental representative accepted that the earlier ruling applied, and the adjudication order was therefore set aside. The matter was remitted to the GST authority for reconsideration in accordance with that binding decision. Case-Laws GST Wed, 18 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773390