<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Suppression of material facts undermined coercion claim over GST payments, prompting costs and an explanatory affidavit.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=102438</link>
    <description>Suppression of material facts in writ proceedings arose from the petitioner&#039;s failure to disclose an anticipatory bail application and its withdrawal while alleging that GST dues and penalty were paid under coercion. The withdrawal record stated that a reasonable amount had been deposited under protest and that, after appearing before authorities and giving a statement, the petitioner did not apprehend arrest. The HC found prima facie that the non-disclosure was material and that the payment was voluntary. It directed the petitioner to deposit costs and file an affidavit explaining the suppression, while keeping further orders open.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 06 Aug 2026 09:11:07 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 06 Aug 2026 09:11:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=915609" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Suppression of material facts undermined coercion claim over GST payments, prompting costs and an explanatory affidavit.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=102438</link>
      <description>Suppression of material facts in writ proceedings arose from the petitioner&#039;s failure to disclose an anticipatory bail application and its withdrawal while alleging that GST dues and penalty were paid under coercion. The withdrawal record stated that a reasonable amount had been deposited under protest and that, after appearing before authorities and giving a statement, the petitioner did not apprehend arrest. The HC found prima facie that the non-disclosure was material and that the payment was voluntary. It directed the petitioner to deposit costs and file an affidavit explaining the suppression, while keeping further orders open.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 06 Aug 2026 09:11:07 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=102438</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>