https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782321 A writ petition challenging show cause notices for alleged non-compliance with Rule 142(1A) of the CGST Rules was declined because an alternate and efficacious statutory appeal was available after the notices were disposed of by subsequent order. The Court held that the petitioner could raise, before the Appellate Authority, the contention that Rule 142(1A) was mandatory and the consequences of non-compliance, noting that the rule's amended use of "may" from 15 October 2020 kept that issue open. The Court therefore followed the settled practice of exhausting alternative remedies and granted liberty to pursue all contentions in appeal. en-us Mon, 24 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 27 Nov 2025 08:36:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782321 A writ petition challenging show cause notices for alleged non-compliance with Rule 142(1A) of the CGST Rules was declined because an alternate and efficacious statutory appeal was available after the notices were disposed of by subsequent order. The Court held that the petitioner could raise, before the Appellate Authority, the contention that Rule 142(1A) was mandatory and the consequences of non-compliance, noting that the rule's amended use of "may" from 15 October 2020 kept that issue open. The Court therefore followed the settled practice of exhausting alternative remedies and granted liberty to pursue all contentions in appeal. Case-Laws GST Mon, 24 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782321