https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773922 The HC quashed a notice issued under Section 79(1)(c) of the CGST Act due to improper service. The notice was addressed to a bank branch manager rather than the petitioner, who was allegedly liable to pay dues. The Court held that Section 79 mandates service on the person from whom money is due, enabling them to contest liability under Section 79(1)(c)(vii). Since the petitioner was not served, they were deprived of this statutory right. The procedural requirement is mandatory, not directory, and non-compliance vitiates the notice. The Court granted liberty to respondents to serve fresh notice on the petitioner at correct address. en-us Tue, 24 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 16 Apr 2026 12:25:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773922 The HC quashed a notice issued under Section 79(1)(c) of the CGST Act due to improper service. The notice was addressed to a bank branch manager rather than the petitioner, who was allegedly liable to pay dues. The Court held that Section 79 mandates service on the person from whom money is due, enabling them to contest liability under Section 79(1)(c)(vii). Since the petitioner was not served, they were deprived of this statutory right. The procedural requirement is mandatory, not directory, and non-compliance vitiates the notice. The Court granted liberty to respondents to serve fresh notice on the petitioner at correct address. Case-Laws GST Tue, 24 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773922