TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Digital Signature Flaw Nullifies GST Notice, Procedural Compliance Crucial for Valid Tax Enforcement Under Rule 26(3)</h1> <h3>Sandip Kumar Singh Versus State of Jharkhand, The Additional Commissioner of State Tax, The Joint Commissioner of State Tax, The State Tax Officer and The Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Dhanbad</h3> HC invalidated GST notice DRC-01A due to absence of mandatory digital signature under Rule 26(3) of Jharkhand GST Rules. Court found entire document chain ... Validity of Show cause notice issued under section 73 without digital signature - Requirements of mandatary procedure for issuance of notices, certificates or orders as per Rule 26(3) of the (Jharkhand Goods and Service Tax) Rules, 2017 - challenging the validity of Form GST DRC-01A - HELD THAT:- Though, counsel for the respondents sought to sustain the same contending that Annexure-7 which is the impugned order contains the signature of the 5th respondent, we do not find any merit in the said contention for the reason that the preceding intimation being DRC-01A and the show cause notice under section 73 dt. 29.04.2023 do not bear the digital signature of the 5th respondent and, therefore, are vitiated. Consequently, Annexure-7 is also vitiated. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. Annexure-7 and 8 are both set-aside but liberty is granted to the respondents to initiate proceeding afresh in a proper manner, give opportunity to the petitioner to reply to the intimation/show cause notice and then pass a reasoned order in accordance with law. The Jharkhand High Court, in a writ petition challenging the validity of Form GST DRC-01A dated 06.12.2022 and subsequent show cause notice under section 73 of the Jharkhand GST Act, held that these documents are invalid as they lack the mandatory digital signature required under Rule 26(3) of the Jharkhand Goods and Service Tax Rules, 2017. The Court emphasized that issuance of notices, certificates, or orders must be through a digital signature certificate. Reliance was placed on a prior judgment (W.P.(T) No. 1354 of 2025, Rajendra Modi v. State of Jharkhand). Despite the respondents' contention that the impugned order (Annexure-7) bears the signature of the 5th respondent, the Court found the entire chain of documents vitiated due to the unsigned preceding notices. The writ petition was allowed, setting aside Annexures-7 and 8, but respondents were granted liberty to initiate proceedings afresh, ensuring proper issuance, opportunity to reply, and a reasoned order 'in accordance with law.'
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
