https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=446314 Section 73 CGST proceedings were vitiated for breach of audi alteram partem because, despite the SCN granting 30 days to respond, the authority passed the demand order within eight clear days, which the HC held fell far short of "reasonable opportunity" implicit in s.73(1); the consequential demand order was therefore unsustainable and the matter could not be decided against the noticee on that basis, resulting in interference. The HC further held that an SCN must disclose sufficient foundational material and material particulars to enable an effective reply, and that a vague, sketchy notice is vulnerable to judicial review; on this ground as well, the impugned SCN was invalid, and the SCN was set aside and the petition allowed. en-us Mon, 20 Nov 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 07 Jan 2026 14:30:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=446314 Section 73 CGST proceedings were vitiated for breach of audi alteram partem because, despite the SCN granting 30 days to respond, the authority passed the demand order within eight clear days, which the HC held fell far short of "reasonable opportunity" implicit in s.73(1); the consequential demand order was therefore unsustainable and the matter could not be decided against the noticee on that basis, resulting in interference. The HC further held that an SCN must disclose sufficient foundational material and material particulars to enable an effective reply, and that a vague, sketchy notice is vulnerable to judicial review; on this ground as well, the impugned SCN was invalid, and the SCN was set aside and the petition allowed. Case-Laws GST Mon, 20 Nov 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=446314