https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782068 Delhi HC held that under s.74 of the CGST Act, a distinction exists between payments made under s.74(5) and s.74(8). Since the petitioner had already paid tax and interest before issuance of the demand-cum-SCN under s.74(1), and the maximum penalty computed was only Rs.19,000, relegating the petitioner to appellate remedy was unnecessary. The HC directed that if the petitioner deposits 15% of the penalty amount within four weeks, the SCN shall be deemed closed under s.74(5) and the impugned order shall stand quashed qua the petitioner alone. The petition was disposed of with this direction, without affecting other noticees. en-us Fri, 21 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 24 Nov 2025 09:51:53 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782068 Delhi HC held that under s.74 of the CGST Act, a distinction exists between payments made under s.74(5) and s.74(8). Since the petitioner had already paid tax and interest before issuance of the demand-cum-SCN under s.74(1), and the maximum penalty computed was only Rs.19,000, relegating the petitioner to appellate remedy was unnecessary. The HC directed that if the petitioner deposits 15% of the penalty amount within four weeks, the SCN shall be deemed closed under s.74(5) and the impugned order shall stand quashed qua the petitioner alone. The petition was disposed of with this direction, without affecting other noticees. Case-Laws GST Fri, 21 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782068