https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793192 Input tax credit was alleged to have been wrongly claimed in the IGST column, but the petitioner asserted that the error was inadvertent, the credit was later voluntarily reversed, and it was neither utilised nor refunded. The HC held that these facts required reconsideration because the petitioner had not effectively placed its defence in the earlier proceedings. It interfered with the adjudication order and the rejection of rectification, and restored the matter to the adjudicating authority so the petitioner could file a detailed response with supporting documents and the authority could decide afresh whether liability could still be fastened. en-us Thu, 04 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 10 Jun 2026 07:26:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793192 Input tax credit was alleged to have been wrongly claimed in the IGST column, but the petitioner asserted that the error was inadvertent, the credit was later voluntarily reversed, and it was neither utilised nor refunded. The HC held that these facts required reconsideration because the petitioner had not effectively placed its defence in the earlier proceedings. It interfered with the adjudication order and the rejection of rectification, and restored the matter to the adjudicating authority so the petitioner could file a detailed response with supporting documents and the authority could decide afresh whether liability could still be fastened. Case-Laws GST Thu, 04 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793192