TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the demand order under Section 73 of the Assam Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 was sustainable when no prior show cause notice had been issued and only the summary in Form GST DRC-01 together with the attachment to determination of tax had been served.
Analysis: The Summary of Show Cause Notice in Form GST DRC-01 and the attachment to determination of tax were held not to be a substitute for a proper show cause notice under Section 73(1). The statutory scheme requires the proper officer to issue the show cause notice, the statement under Section 73(3), and the order under Section 73(9) in the manner prescribed, and compliance with the procedural requirements is a condition precedent to a valid demand order. In the absence of a prior show cause notice and due observance of the statutory procedure, the impugned order could not be sustained. The issue of opportunity of hearing was also noted as part of the procedural infirmity.
Conclusion: The demand order was invalid and liable to be set aside for want of a proper prior show cause notice and non-compliance with the mandatory procedure.
Final Conclusion: The writ petition succeeded, the impugned demand order was quashed, and the authorities were left free to initiate proceedings afresh in accordance with law.
Ratio Decidendi: In proceedings under Section 73, service of a summary notice cannot replace the statutory show cause notice, and strict compliance with the prescribed notice and hearing procedure is mandatory before a valid demand order can be passed.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
