https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756937 A summary demand in Form GST DRC-07 under Rule 142(5) of the GST Rules cannot independently sustain recovery or bank attachment unless supported by a valid underlying adjudication order creating the demand. Here, the summary recorded demand particulars, but no corresponding order was shown to exist, so it had no legal efficacy. A notice under Section 161 of the Gujarat GST Act could not cure the defect, because rectification presupposes an existing order. The summary demand, and the consequent coercive recovery and attachment, were therefore quashed and set aside. en-us Fri, 09 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 07 May 2025 23:18:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756937 A summary demand in Form GST DRC-07 under Rule 142(5) of the GST Rules cannot independently sustain recovery or bank attachment unless supported by a valid underlying adjudication order creating the demand. Here, the summary recorded demand particulars, but no corresponding order was shown to exist, so it had no legal efficacy. A notice under Section 161 of the Gujarat GST Act could not cure the defect, because rectification presupposes an existing order. The summary demand, and the consequent coercive recovery and attachment, were therefore quashed and set aside. Case-Laws GST Fri, 09 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756937