M/S. Dilip Kumar Mohanty, Khordha vs. Comnr Of CT And GST, Cuttack
Held
The Court directed the revenue to refund the excess amount recovered from the petitioner's e-ledger. The revenue can retain a maximum of 20% of the disputed tax.
Facts
The petitioner had an appeal pending against a tax demand. Despite depositing 10% of the demand and the balance being stayed, the revenue recovered the remaining amount from the petitioner's e-ledger. The appellate forum (Tribunal) is not constituted.
Key Issues
Whether the revenue can recover the balance tax demand when an appeal is pending and the Tribunal is not constituted. What is the maximum pre-deposit required in such circumstances.
Sections Cited
Section 73
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
2024
Mrs. Wallace, learned advocate virtually appears on behalf of petitioner and submits, her client had preferred appeal against order dated 14th March, 2022 of the proper officer directing tax demand of ₹26,93,540/- under sec
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Orissa High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.