https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780452 The assessment order was interfered with in light of the challenge to the notification issued under Section 168A of the CGST Act and the exclusion of the relevant period for limitation under Section 73, as recognised in the earlier Principal Bench ruling and the Supreme Court's Article 142 order. The Court also noted the petitioner's delayed challenge and non-response to prior notices, but nevertheless quashed the order and remitted the matter for fresh adjudication on merits. The bank account attachment was directed to be lifted forthwith. en-us Mon, 13 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 30 Oct 2025 08:22:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780452 The assessment order was interfered with in light of the challenge to the notification issued under Section 168A of the CGST Act and the exclusion of the relevant period for limitation under Section 73, as recognised in the earlier Principal Bench ruling and the Supreme Court's Article 142 order. The Court also noted the petitioner's delayed challenge and non-response to prior notices, but nevertheless quashed the order and remitted the matter for fresh adjudication on merits. The bank account attachment was directed to be lifted forthwith. Case-Laws GST Mon, 13 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780452