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
HomeGSTConstitutional Challenge to S. 93(1)(b) of CGST Act: Rajasthan High Court Issues...

Constitutional Challenge to S. 93(1)(b) of CGST Act: Rajasthan High Court Issues Notice 

Published on

🚀 Stay Connected With JurisHour

WhatsApp X Telegram

The Rajasthan High Court, Jodhpur, has issued notice to the Union of India and other respondents in a constitutional challenge to Section 93(1)(b) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, raising an important question concerning the statutory liability of a legal representative in cases involving a deceased taxable person.

The Bench of Chief Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal and Justice Vinit Kumar Mathur said, “Application for grant of interim relief filed by the petitioners shall be considered on the next date of hearing.”

Buy Now: E-Magazine: 1000+ Landmark GST Judgments (2017–2026)

The petitioner has challenged the constitutional validity of Section 93(1)(b) of the CGST Act, 2017.

During the hearing, counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that Section 93(1)(b) of the CGST Act is unconstitutional in light of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Shabina Abraham v. Collector of Central Excise and Customs, reported at 2015 (322) E.L.T. 372 (S.C.), decided on July 29, 2015.

The Rajasthan High Court has, at this stage, recorded the petitioners’ submission and directed issuance of notice to the respondents. The order does not finally determine the constitutional validity of Section 93(1)(b).

The order specifically records: “Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that Section 93(1)(b) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 is unconstitutional in light of the decision rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Shabina Abraham vs. Collector of Central Excise and Customs 2015 (322) E.L.T. 372 (S.C) dated 29.07.2015.”

Following the submission, the Bench directed that notice be issued to the respondents.

The Rajasthan High Court has directed that the connected matters be listed after ten weeks.

Thus, the immediate proceedings will involve the respondents filing their replies within the two-week period granted by the Court, followed by consideration of the petitioners’ interim relief application and further examination of the constitutional challenge.

Membership Required to Access Case Details & Order Copy

To view the complete Case Details and Download Order Copy, you must have an active membership. Please subscribe to continue.

Membership Required

You must be a member to access this content.

View Membership Levels

Already a member? Log in here

Read More: Madras High Court Stays GST Suo Motu Rectification Order Issued Beyond 6 Month Limitation Without Prior Notice

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

JURISHOUR | TAX LAW DAILY BULLETIN : 13 OCTOBER, 2026

Here’s the Tax Law Daily Bulletin for October 13, 2026.GSTGST REFUND RECOVERY LIMITATION DISPUTE...

Flat Owner Not Liable To Pay Tax On Redevelopment Hardship Compensation: ITAT

The Mumbai Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that ₹82...

GSTR-9, GSTR-9C Forms Live On GST Portal

The GST portal has enabled the annual return filing facility for the financial year...

ED Letter Alone Can’t Block Property Registration Without Statutory Restraint: Orissa High Court

The Orissa High Court has held that an administrative communication from the Enforcement Directorate...

More like this

JURISHOUR | TAX LAW DAILY BULLETIN : 13 OCTOBER, 2026

Here’s the Tax Law Daily Bulletin for October 13, 2026.GSTGST REFUND RECOVERY LIMITATION DISPUTE...

Flat Owner Not Liable To Pay Tax On Redevelopment Hardship Compensation: ITAT

The Mumbai Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that ₹82...

GSTR-9, GSTR-9C Forms Live On GST Portal

The GST portal has enabled the annual return filing facility for the financial year...