https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464943 HC followed its earlier decision in a similar matter and held that the petitioner is entitled to reimbursement of the differential GST amount claimed. Relying on the coordinate bench ruling in a prior case, the court directed the respondent to reimburse the GST as indicated in the petitioner's representation. The issue of interest liability under Section 50 of the CGST Act, 2017, was treated as covered by the same precedent. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of on the same terms, without independent re-examination of the factual or legal issues. en-us Fri, 21 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 24 Nov 2025 18:58:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464943 HC followed its earlier decision in a similar matter and held that the petitioner is entitled to reimbursement of the differential GST amount claimed. Relying on the coordinate bench ruling in a prior case, the court directed the respondent to reimburse the GST as indicated in the petitioner's representation. The issue of interest liability under Section 50 of the CGST Act, 2017, was treated as covered by the same precedent. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of on the same terms, without independent re-examination of the factual or legal issues. Case-Laws GST Fri, 21 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464943