https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790920 A waiver application under Section 128A of the CGST Act could not be rejected solely as time-barred where the filing period was framed in enabling language and was not expressly made mandatory. The Court treated the use of "may" as significant, holding that the stipulated period was not an inflexible bar to consideration of the statutory request. On that construction, rejection only on limitation grounds was unsustainable, and the applicant was entitled to reconsideration of the waiver claim in accordance with law. en-us Fri, 17 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 02 May 2026 07:40:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790920 A waiver application under Section 128A of the CGST Act could not be rejected solely as time-barred where the filing period was framed in enabling language and was not expressly made mandatory. The Court treated the use of "may" as significant, holding that the stipulated period was not an inflexible bar to consideration of the statutory request. On that construction, rejection only on limitation grounds was unsustainable, and the applicant was entitled to reconsideration of the waiver claim in accordance with law. Case-Laws GST Fri, 17 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790920