https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=795091 Section 74 extended limitation was valid because admitted excess input tax credit and failure to substantiate turnover reconciliation through VAT and GST returns supported the statutory basis for alleging wrongful availment. The High Court maintained the assessment for excess credit, holding that payment of tax alone did not discharge the separate liability for interest and penalty; the unpaid penalty was therefore sustained. Turnover differences between GSTR-9 and GSTR-9C, attributed to pre-GST VAT sales, out-of-State sales and financial-statement reconciliation, required fresh adjudication because supporting returns and records had not been furnished. That component was remitted for reconsideration upon submission of adequate documents. en-us Mon, 08 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 16 Jul 2026 09:07:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=795091 Section 74 extended limitation was valid because admitted excess input tax credit and failure to substantiate turnover reconciliation through VAT and GST returns supported the statutory basis for alleging wrongful availment. The High Court maintained the assessment for excess credit, holding that payment of tax alone did not discharge the separate liability for interest and penalty; the unpaid penalty was therefore sustained. Turnover differences between GSTR-9 and GSTR-9C, attributed to pre-GST VAT sales, out-of-State sales and financial-statement reconciliation, required fresh adjudication because supporting returns and records had not been furnished. That component was remitted for reconsideration upon submission of adequate documents. Case-Laws GST Mon, 08 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=795091