Specific GST contravention must be stated in notice; vague template show-cause proceedings can be quashed despite appellate remedy.

A GST show-cause notice under section 73 must clearly specify the alleged contravention and the basis of demand; a generic template notice without striking out irrelevant portions is legally defective, and the summary in Form GST DRC-01 cannot cure that defect. Because the foundational notice violated mandatory procedure and deprived the noticee of a meaningful opportunity to respond, the consequential Form GST DRC-07 order could not survive. The availability of a statutory appellate remedy did not bar writ jurisdiction where the challenge went to the validity of the initiation of proceedings and natural justice. The impugned notices and order were quashed, with liberty to start fresh proceedings in accordance with law.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether the writ petition was maintainable despite the statutory appellate remedy in view of the alleged breach of natural justice and mandatory procedure; (ii) whether the show-cause notice under section 73 of the JGST Act, the summary notice in Form GST DRC-01, and the consequential order in Form GST DRC-07 were sustainable when they did not specify the precise contravention and were issued in a generic format.

Issue (i): whether the writ petition was maintainable despite the statutory appellate remedy in view of the alleged breach of natural justice and mandatory procedure.

Analysis: The challenge was founded on a pleaded violation of the statutory procedure for initiation of proceedings and denial of a meaningful opportunity of hearing. Where the complaint is that the foundational notice itself is legally defective and the proceedings are vitiated at the threshold, the existence of an appellate remedy does not bar recourse to writ jurisdiction.

Conclusion: The writ petition was maintainable.

Issue (ii): whether the show-cause notice under section 73 of the JGST Act, the summary notice in Form GST DRC-01, and the consequential order in Form GST DRC-07 were sustainable when they did not specify the precise contravention and were issued in a generic format.

Analysis: A notice under section 73 must disclose the alleged contravention and the basis of demand with sufficient clarity so that the noticee can respond effectively. A summary in Form GST DRC-01 is only an adjunct and cannot replace a proper show-cause notice. On the record, the notice was issued in a template form without striking off irrelevant portions and without indicating the exact default alleged against the petitioner. As the foundational notice was defective, the summary notice and the resulting order could not survive.

Conclusion: The impugned notices and the consequential order were invalid and liable to be quashed.

Final Conclusion: The assessee succeeded on the challenge to the GST proceedings, and the department was left free to commence fresh proceedings in accordance with law from the appropriate stage.

Ratio Decidendi: A GST show-cause notice must state the specific contravention and cannot be substituted by a generic summary notice; where the foundational notice is vague and violates mandatory procedure and natural justice, writ interference is warranted notwithstanding the availability of an appellate remedy.

---