https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778837 Dispute concerned the mechanism for uploading PMT-03 to enable re-credit of a rejected IGST refund amount, where the GST Network and CGST Department took the view that PMT-03 was not required under their understanding of portal procedure and electronic credit ledger treatment. The matter remained unresolved between the tax administrations, so the Court impleaded the State GST Commissioner, Rudraprayag, Uttarakhand, and sought further assistance from the relevant authorities. No final adjudication on the re-credit mechanism was recorded, and the writ petition was restored for further hearing. en-us Thu, 21 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 23 Mar 2026 11:57:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778837 Dispute concerned the mechanism for uploading PMT-03 to enable re-credit of a rejected IGST refund amount, where the GST Network and CGST Department took the view that PMT-03 was not required under their understanding of portal procedure and electronic credit ledger treatment. The matter remained unresolved between the tax administrations, so the Court impleaded the State GST Commissioner, Rudraprayag, Uttarakhand, and sought further assistance from the relevant authorities. No final adjudication on the re-credit mechanism was recorded, and the writ petition was restored for further hearing. Case-Laws GST Thu, 21 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778837