Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether interim protection was warranted against the continuation of the GST adjudication proceedings and the fixed personal hearing while the writ petitions challenging the jurisdiction and validity of the show cause notices remained pending.
Analysis: The writ petitions questioned the jurisdiction and validity of the show cause notices issued in Form GST DRG-01. The Adjudicating Authority had fixed a final personal hearing for the next day and indicated that an ex parte final order could follow under Section 74(1) with tax, interest and penalty. In view of the pending writ petitions, the Court found the adjournment refusal and the imminent hearing to be in undue haste and held that the petitioners had raised arguable issues requiring consideration. Interim interference was considered necessary to preserve the subject matter of the writ petitions.
Conclusion: The Adjudicating Authority was directed to grant an adjournment and fix the hearing after 23.6.2026, and the hearing scheduled for 19.6.2026 was not to proceed.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a writ petition raises arguable jurisdictional challenges to GST show cause notices, the Court may grant interim protection to prevent the adjudication from reaching an irreversible stage and preserve the subject matter pending consideration of the writ.