https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785971 Alleged procedural irregularity in service and summary adjudication was examined; incomplete production of email extracts about notices led the court to treat service reliability as disputed and justify protective measures. To secure the public revenue and protect a vulnerable respondent, the court directed an interim deposit of Rs. 25,00,000 by the petitioner's director or her son within 30 days; failure to deposit authorises respondents to treat the petition as dismissed in limine and take further steps against the son. The writ petition was disposed with those conditions. en-us Tue, 27 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 03 Feb 2026 08:39:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785971 Alleged procedural irregularity in service and summary adjudication was examined; incomplete production of email extracts about notices led the court to treat service reliability as disputed and justify protective measures. To secure the public revenue and protect a vulnerable respondent, the court directed an interim deposit of Rs. 25,00,000 by the petitioner's director or her son within 30 days; failure to deposit authorises respondents to treat the petition as dismissed in limine and take further steps against the son. The writ petition was disposed with those conditions. Case-Laws GST Tue, 27 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785971