Phoenix Spaces (Guntur) (P.) Ltd. v. Additional Commissioner of Central Tax

The ruling in brief

Where department prematurely recovered entire confirmed GST demand from petitioner's bank before expiry of second appeal period and subsequently re- credited amount to e-cash ledger, dispute being limited to refund to bank versus e- cash credit, petitioner was granted liberty to apply for refund and application was to be decided expeditiously in accordance with law

Related rulings

Supreme Court21 Sept 2026

For revenue

Matrix Cellular (international) Services (P.) Ltd. v. Principal Commissioner, State Tax, Delhi

SLP dismissed against review petition of High Court holding that where assessee withdrew refund application after issuance of deficiency memo and later sought interest for that disputed period in review petition on ground of error apparent, as no error or mistake was found in earlier judgment denying interest for that period, review petition was not maintainable and not considered on merits

Madras High Court25 Aug 2026

For revenue

Zigma Machinery & Equipment Solutions v. Assistant Commissioner Coimbatore-I Division

Where assessee obtained interim stay against recovery measures initiated following assessment, such stay order only suspended recovery action and did not affect prior blocking of electronic credit ledger, meaning amounts in electronic credit ledger could not be debited for recovery during validity of stay, but order itself did not unfreeze or impact pre-existing ledger blockage. GST: Where electronic credit ledger was blocked after assessment for recovery of dues, such negative blocking fell within recovery modes under Section 79, as its wide ambit covers deduction from money or goods, garnishee action, distraint and sale, and recovery with Collector or Magistrate assistance, whereas Rule 86A deals only with provisional restriction before liability determination, so plea against negative blocking under Section 79 was rejected

Bombay High Court5 Aug 2026

For assesseeRemanded

BVG India Ltd. v. Union of India

Where garnishee proceedings and recovery notices were initiated for interest on delayed payment despite petitioner’s pending representations disputing interest liability and computation, and no decision on these representations was made by authority, matter was required to be decided by passing a reasoned order on aforesaid representations, until then, no further recovery steps could be taken

Related rulings

Supreme Court21 Sept 2026

For revenue

Phoenix Spaces (Guntur) (P.) Ltd. v. Additional Commissioner of Central Tax

The ruling in brief

Provisions considered

Phoenix Spaces (Guntur) (P.) Ltd. v. Additional Commissioner of Central Tax

The ruling in brief

Provisions considered

Read the full analysis

Read the full analysis

Matrix Cellular (international) Services (P.) Ltd. v. Principal Commissioner, State Tax, Delhi

Zigma Machinery & Equipment Solutions v. Assistant Commissioner Coimbatore-I Division

BVG India Ltd. v. Union of India