https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775634 The HC held that since the petitioner had discharged the entire tax liability through the electronic credit ledger before any notice was issued, there was no wilful mis-statement or suppression attracting Sec. 74 of the GST Act. The petitioner's failure to offset the tax from the credit ledger was inadvertent. The court directed the AO to pass a fresh de novo order under Sec. 73, after giving the petitioner an opportunity of hearing, within three months. The invocation of Sec. 74(1) was set aside and the petition was disposed of accordingly. en-us Thu, 10 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 28 Jul 2025 08:27:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775634 The HC held that since the petitioner had discharged the entire tax liability through the electronic credit ledger before any notice was issued, there was no wilful mis-statement or suppression attracting Sec. 74 of the GST Act. The petitioner's failure to offset the tax from the credit ledger was inadvertent. The court directed the AO to pass a fresh de novo order under Sec. 73, after giving the petitioner an opportunity of hearing, within three months. The invocation of Sec. 74(1) was set aside and the petition was disposed of accordingly. Case-Laws GST Thu, 10 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775634