https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791657 The Karnataka High Court held that the time limit for filing a waiver application under Section 128A of the CGST Act was directory, not mandatory, because the notification used the expression "may" for applications filed within three months from the notified date. The department could not treat that period as an absolute bar and reject the application solely as delayed. The rejection was therefore quashed, and the waiver request had to be considered in accordance with law, with the related GST proceedings kept in abeyance pending such consideration. en-us Fri, 17 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 14 May 2026 09:01:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791657 The Karnataka High Court held that the time limit for filing a waiver application under Section 128A of the CGST Act was directory, not mandatory, because the notification used the expression "may" for applications filed within three months from the notified date. The department could not treat that period as an absolute bar and reject the application solely as delayed. The rejection was therefore quashed, and the waiver request had to be considered in accordance with law, with the related GST proceedings kept in abeyance pending such consideration. Case-Laws GST Fri, 17 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791657