https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760423 A challenge to a demand-cum-show cause notice under Section 74 of the CGST Act was not entertained because the notice was issued by a competent authority and the petitioners were expected to use the statutory adjudicatory process by filing a reply. The High Court held that a writ petition cannot be used to bypass the notice proceedings on a jurisdiction objection at this stage, so the petition was dismissed as premature. The substantive questions on whether charges paid under the Motor Vehicles Act form part of the value of supply under Section 15(2) and whether GST is payable under the Reverse Charge Mechanism were left open for decision by the adjudicating authority. en-us Fri, 19 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 19 Oct 2024 10:17:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760423 A challenge to a demand-cum-show cause notice under Section 74 of the CGST Act was not entertained because the notice was issued by a competent authority and the petitioners were expected to use the statutory adjudicatory process by filing a reply. The High Court held that a writ petition cannot be used to bypass the notice proceedings on a jurisdiction objection at this stage, so the petition was dismissed as premature. The substantive questions on whether charges paid under the Motor Vehicles Act form part of the value of supply under Section 15(2) and whether GST is payable under the Reverse Charge Mechanism were left open for decision by the adjudicating authority. Case-Laws GST Fri, 19 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760423