DRC-01 Summary Not a Substitute for Statutory SCN | HC

Case Details: Arnab Kumar vs. State of Assam - [2026] 185 taxmann.com 107 (Gauhati)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

• Soumitra Saikia, J.
• A K Gupta, Ms M Dey, Ms B Sarma & R S Mishra, Advs. for the Petitioner.

Facts of the Case

The petitioner challenged demand proceedings on the ground that no proper show cause notice (SCN) was served, and only a summary in GST DRC-01 with an attachment showing tax determination was issued. It was submitted that such summary could not substitute a statutory notice under Section 73 of the CGST Act. The petitioner further contended that attachments to GST DRC-01 and GST DRC-07 lacked the digital signature or e-authentication as required, rendering them invalid. It was also submitted that despite requesting a personal hearing in GST DRC-06, no such opportunity was granted before passing the adverse order in GST DRC-07. The matter was accordingly placed before the High Court.

High Court Held

The High Court held that the issuance of a proper SCN specifying the reasons is a mandatory prerequisite for the initiation of proceedings under Section 73 of the CGST Act, and a summary in the GST DRC-01 cannot substitute for this statutory requirement. It held that the statutory scheme clearly distinguishes between a SCN and its summary, and both are required to be issued independently in accordance with Rule 142 of the CGST Rules. The Court also held that the requirement of granting a personal hearing under Section 75 is mandatory where requested or where adverse action is contemplated, and denial of such an opportunity vitiates the proceedings. Accordingly, the Court set aside the impugned order and granted liberty to the jurisdictional officer under CGST to initiate proceedings afresh in accordance with due process of law.

List of Cases Referred to

• Silver Oak Villas LLP v. Asstt. Commissioner (ST) [2024] 161 taxmann.com 103/103 GST 713/86 GSTL 161 (Telangana) (para 3)
• A V Bhanoji Row v. Asstt. Commissioner (ST) [2025] 170 taxmann.com 799/94 GSTL 430 (Andhra Pradesh) (para 3)
• NKAS Services (P.) Ltd. v. State of Jharkhand [2022] 136 taxmann.com 138/91 GST 736/58 GSTL 257 (Jharkhand) (para 3)
• LC Infra Projects (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India [2019] 109 taxmann.com 141/75 GST 751/28 GSTL 3 (Karnataka) (para 3)
• Railsys Engineers (P.) Ltd. v. Additional Commissioner of Central GST, Appeals-II [2022] 141 taxmann.com 527/94 GST 51/65 GSTL 159 (Delhi) (para 20).