https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776285 Additional documents produced after the adjudication showed that the supplier had discharged the tax liability, and the earlier disclosure gap in GSTR-01 did not by itself resolve the entitlement issue. Because the petitioner could not place those supporting records before the adjudicating authority when the matter was first decided, the subsequent material was treated as relevant to whether tax had in fact been paid and whether the claimed benefit was available. The impugned adjudication and summary orders were set aside, and the matter was remitted for fresh consideration after taking the additional documents on record. en-us Wed, 16 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 07 Aug 2025 07:05:03 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776285 Additional documents produced after the adjudication showed that the supplier had discharged the tax liability, and the earlier disclosure gap in GSTR-01 did not by itself resolve the entitlement issue. Because the petitioner could not place those supporting records before the adjudicating authority when the matter was first decided, the subsequent material was treated as relevant to whether tax had in fact been paid and whether the claimed benefit was available. The impugned adjudication and summary orders were set aside, and the matter was remitted for fresh consideration after taking the additional documents on record. Case-Laws GST Wed, 16 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776285