https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301083 The High Court upheld the validity of the notice issued under Section 73(1) of the UPGST Act, 2017, finding the Assistant Commissioner to be the proper officer for the respondent. The Court emphasized the need for independent application of mind, directed examination of disputed facts, and advised issuing future notices carefully. The petition was disposed of, maintaining the notice's validity and stressing the significance of proper procedure and independent decision-making in such cases. en-us Thu, 18 Nov 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 20 Jul 2022 12:42:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301083 The High Court upheld the validity of the notice issued under Section 73(1) of the UPGST Act, 2017, finding the Assistant Commissioner to be the proper officer for the respondent. The Court emphasized the need for independent application of mind, directed examination of disputed facts, and advised issuing future notices carefully. The petition was disposed of, maintaining the notice's validity and stressing the significance of proper procedure and independent decision-making in such cases. Case-Laws GST Thu, 18 Nov 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301083