<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2022 (3) TMI 446 - JHARKHAND HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=419408</link>
    <description>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.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 02 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 01 Apr 2025 18:06:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=672519" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (3) TMI 446 - JHARKHAND HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=419408</link>
      <description>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.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 02 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=419408</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>