<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2025 (1) TMI 725 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764661</link>
    <description>The Gauhati HC held that a Summary of Show Cause Notice (SCN) in GST DRC-01 form cannot substitute for a proper SCN under Section 73 of CGST/AGST Act, 2017. The court ruled that the Proper Officer must issue a detailed SCN specifying reasons and circumstances for invoking Section 73, in addition to the summary form. The summary alone, even with tax determination attachments, does not constitute valid initiation of proceedings under Section 73. The court further found violation of Section 75(4) as the petitioner requested but was denied an opportunity of hearing, despite statutory mandate requiring such opportunity when requested in writing. The impugned order was deemed contrary to Section 73 and Rule 142(1)(a) provisions. The writ petition was disposed of in favor of the petitioner.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 08 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 21 Jul 2025 14:16:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=788943" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (1) TMI 725 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764661</link>
      <description>The Gauhati HC held that a Summary of Show Cause Notice (SCN) in GST DRC-01 form cannot substitute for a proper SCN under Section 73 of CGST/AGST Act, 2017. The court ruled that the Proper Officer must issue a detailed SCN specifying reasons and circumstances for invoking Section 73, in addition to the summary form. The summary alone, even with tax determination attachments, does not constitute valid initiation of proceedings under Section 73. The court further found violation of Section 75(4) as the petitioner requested but was denied an opportunity of hearing, despite statutory mandate requiring such opportunity when requested in writing. The impugned order was deemed contrary to Section 73 and Rule 142(1)(a) provisions. The writ petition was disposed of in favor of the petitioner.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 08 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764661</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>