https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=98261 Retrospective GST demand on insurance supplies to SEZ units raised a prima facie jurisdictional issue, because the amendment inserting the words "for authorised operations" could not, at this stage, be used to tax past supplies that had been treated as zero-rated. The Court found the challenge arguable on the competence to levy tax retrospectively for the period before 1 October 2023 and noted the statutory definition of "recipient" under the CGST Act, observing that the SEZ units had subscribed to the policies and paid the consideration. Pending final hearing, the impugned orders were stayed. en-us Tue, 31 Mar 2026 08:27:10 +0530 Tue, 31 Mar 2026 08:27:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=98261 Retrospective GST demand on insurance supplies to SEZ units raised a prima facie jurisdictional issue, because the amendment inserting the words "for authorised operations" could not, at this stage, be used to tax past supplies that had been treated as zero-rated. The Court found the challenge arguable on the competence to levy tax retrospectively for the period before 1 October 2023 and noted the statutory definition of "recipient" under the CGST Act, observing that the SEZ units had subscribed to the policies and paid the consideration. Pending final hearing, the impugned orders were stayed. Highlights GST Tue, 31 Mar 2026 08:27:10 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=98261