https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768581 HC dismissed the petition challenging the notification relaxing eligibility criteria for appointment of Technical Member (State) to the GST Tribunal. It held that Section 110(d) CGST Act draws a clear distinction between State Government officers and All-India Service officers, and the proviso allowing relaxation of the 25-year Group A service requirement applies only to State Group A officers, not to All-India Service officers. The petitioner, a retired All-India Service officer, could not claim benefit of this relaxation. The HC rejected arguments that the notification was ultra vires, arbitrary, or tailored to benefit a specific group, noting similar relaxations in several other States. en-us Thu, 03 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 21 Nov 2025 14:32:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768581 HC dismissed the petition challenging the notification relaxing eligibility criteria for appointment of Technical Member (State) to the GST Tribunal. It held that Section 110(d) CGST Act draws a clear distinction between State Government officers and All-India Service officers, and the proviso allowing relaxation of the 25-year Group A service requirement applies only to State Group A officers, not to All-India Service officers. The petitioner, a retired All-India Service officer, could not claim benefit of this relaxation. The HC rejected arguments that the notification was ultra vires, arbitrary, or tailored to benefit a specific group, noting similar relaxations in several other States. Case-Laws GST Thu, 03 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768581