Ask Jurishour AI

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
tdb_templates
saswp_reviews
saswp-collections
saswp_rvs_location
tdc-review-email
web-story-font
web-story
googlesitekit_email
tds_locker
tds_email
saswp
mailpoet_page
mailpoet_email
tdcpt_tunes
tdc-review
pronamic_payment
pronamic_gateway
pronamic_pay_subscr
wpcode
HomeGSTGST Officer Violated Rule 92(3) of CGST Rules By Giving 7 Days...

GST Officer Violated Rule 92(3) of CGST Rules By Giving 7 Days To Reply To SCN Instead Of 15 Days: Bombay HC Names It As “Undue Haste”

GST

Published on

By Mariya Paliwala
GST Officer Violated Rule 92(3) of CGST Rules By Giving 7 Days To Reply To SCN Instead Of 15 Days: Bombay HC Names It As “Undue Haste”

🚀 Stay Connected With JurisHour

WhatsApp X Telegram

The Bombay High Court has frowned on the GST Officer for violating Rule 92(3) of CGST Rules by giving 7 days to reply to Show Cause Notice (SCN) instead of 15 days and named it as an ‘undue haste’. The bench of Justice G. S. Kulkarni and Justice Aarti Sathe has stated, “as to why…

Membership Required

You must be a member to access this content.

View Membership Levels

Already a member? Log in here
Mariya Paliwala
Mariya Paliwalahttps://www.jurishour.in/
Mariya is the Senior Editor at Juris Hour. She has 7+ years of experience on covering tax litigation stories from the Supreme Court, High Courts and various tribunals including CESTAT, ITAT, NCLAT, NCLT, etc. Mariya graduated from MLSU Law College, Udaipur (Raj.) with B.A.LL.B. and also holds an LL.M. She started her career as a freelance tax reporter in the leading online legal news companies.

Latest articles

GST

Support Services To Overseas Group Companies Are Exports, Not Intermediary Services: GSTAT 

The Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT), Delhi, has held that support services...
GST

Closed Premises Alone Can’t Prove Fictitious GST Transactions: GSTAT 

The Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT), Agra Bench, has held that finding...
GST

Seized Diary Entries Alone Can’t Establish Suppressed GST Turnover Without Transaction-Wise Verification: GSTAT

The Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT), Agra Bench, has held that suppressed...
GST

E-Way Bill Part B Lapse Alone Can’t Justify GST Penalty Without Intent To Evade Tax: GSTAT

The Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT), Agra State Bench, has dismissed a...

More like this

GST

Support Services To Overseas Group Companies Are Exports, Not Intermediary Services: GSTAT 

The Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT), Delhi, has held that support services...
GST

Closed Premises Alone Can’t Prove Fictitious GST Transactions: GSTAT 

The Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT), Agra Bench, has held that finding...
GST

Seized Diary Entries Alone Can’t Establish Suppressed GST Turnover Without Transaction-Wise Verification: GSTAT

The Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT), Agra Bench, has held that suppressed...