https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766726 Under the GST demand and recovery scheme, show-cause notices and final orders must comply with the prescribed statutory forms, including authentication by the Proper Officer's signature. The Court held that the signature requirement in Rule 142 and Forms GST DRC-01 and GST DRC-07 has statutory force, and its omission is not a curable technical defect. Rule 26(3) was confined to registration provisions and did not govern demand proceedings, while Section 160 of the CGST Act could not cure the absence of signature. Unsigned notices and orders were therefore invalid and unsustainable. en-us Fri, 28 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 19 Nov 2025 14:44:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766726 Under the GST demand and recovery scheme, show-cause notices and final orders must comply with the prescribed statutory forms, including authentication by the Proper Officer's signature. The Court held that the signature requirement in Rule 142 and Forms GST DRC-01 and GST DRC-07 has statutory force, and its omission is not a curable technical defect. Rule 26(3) was confined to registration provisions and did not govern demand proceedings, while Section 160 of the CGST Act could not cure the absence of signature. Unsigned notices and orders were therefore invalid and unsustainable. Case-Laws GST Fri, 28 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766726