https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789916 A pre-deposit made to maintain an appeal was treated as an amount distinct from tax, interest, penalty or fee, so the refund mechanism under Section 54(1) of the CGST Act was held inapplicable and Rule 89, covering "any other amount," was the proper route. Rejection of the refund claim solely on the basis of an alleged pending SFIO investigation was found unsustainable because no such investigation was pending, initiated or completed. The impugned rejection was set aside and the competent authority was directed to release the amount, with consequential processing and interest if otherwise payable. en-us Mon, 30 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 16 Apr 2026 08:34:10 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789916 A pre-deposit made to maintain an appeal was treated as an amount distinct from tax, interest, penalty or fee, so the refund mechanism under Section 54(1) of the CGST Act was held inapplicable and Rule 89, covering "any other amount," was the proper route. Rejection of the refund claim solely on the basis of an alleged pending SFIO investigation was found unsustainable because no such investigation was pending, initiated or completed. The impugned rejection was set aside and the competent authority was directed to release the amount, with consequential processing and interest if otherwise payable. Case-Laws GST Mon, 30 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789916