https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=433663 Under the GST transition, the omission of Chapter V of the Finance Act, 1994 did not by itself end proceedings relating to past service tax liabilities because Section 174(2) of the CGST Act preserves prior operation, accrued liabilities, investigations, adjudications and other legal proceedings. The earlier notifications governing assignment of show cause notices and adjudication under the service tax regime were treated as continuing within that saved framework, since they were not inconsistent with the later enactment. On that basis, the Madras HC rejected the jurisdictional objection to DGGI-issued notices and upheld the continuity of the pre-GST machinery for legacy matters. en-us Thu, 02 Feb 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 14 Apr 2025 13:19:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=433663 Under the GST transition, the omission of Chapter V of the Finance Act, 1994 did not by itself end proceedings relating to past service tax liabilities because Section 174(2) of the CGST Act preserves prior operation, accrued liabilities, investigations, adjudications and other legal proceedings. The earlier notifications governing assignment of show cause notices and adjudication under the service tax regime were treated as continuing within that saved framework, since they were not inconsistent with the later enactment. On that basis, the Madras HC rejected the jurisdictional objection to DGGI-issued notices and upheld the continuity of the pre-GST machinery for legacy matters. Case-Laws GST Thu, 02 Feb 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=433663