https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783647 The dominant issue was whether the tax authority could insist on further pre-deposit for de novo adjudication when the taxpayer asserted that the confirmed tax demand had already been fully recovered/paid. The HC held that, if full recovery/payment is established, no additional pre-deposit is required for the de novo proceedings arising from the impugned order; the taxpayer must file a comprehensive reply to the show cause notice with supporting documents, treating subsequent orders as an addendum. Separately, the challenge to the assessment order was rejected on merits, resulting in dismissal of that part, while the remaining impugned orders were set aside and remanded subject to deposit of 50% of the disputed tax. en-us Thu, 04 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 19 Dec 2025 08:30:25 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783647 The dominant issue was whether the tax authority could insist on further pre-deposit for de novo adjudication when the taxpayer asserted that the confirmed tax demand had already been fully recovered/paid. The HC held that, if full recovery/payment is established, no additional pre-deposit is required for the de novo proceedings arising from the impugned order; the taxpayer must file a comprehensive reply to the show cause notice with supporting documents, treating subsequent orders as an addendum. Separately, the challenge to the assessment order was rejected on merits, resulting in dismissal of that part, while the remaining impugned orders were set aside and remanded subject to deposit of 50% of the disputed tax. Case-Laws GST Thu, 04 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783647