HIMMATSINGH BHAVARSINGH CHADANA v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. – BOMBAY HIGH COURT
High Court, Bombay
M. S. Sonak, Justice & Advait M. Sethna, Justice
HIMMATSINGH BHAVARSINGH CHADANA
v.
UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
WRIT PETITION No. 9558 of 2025 dated 16.09.2025
Law : GST
Act Name : Central Goods & Service Tax Act, 2017
Rule Number : Rule 26
Rule Name : Central Goods & Services Tax Rules, 2017
Decision : In favour of assessee
Cancellation of registration – Retrospective effect – Appeal dismissed as barred by limitation – Petitioner contented order neither signed nor digitally signed as required under Rule 26(3) of CGST Rules, 2017 and hence void ab initio – Department argued filing of appeal implied service of signed order and at relevant time no provision existed for digital signature on correspondence – Rule 26(3) effective from 22.06.2017 mandates digital signature/authentication – Onus on department to establish compliance – Held: Writ petition allowed – Order declared invalid until duly signed/digitally signed – Appellate order does not survive – Department to reissue duly signed order and petitioner free to avail remedy of appeal.
Represented By:
Counsel for the Petitioner: Nirmal Pasaria
Continue Reading...
This is only a preview of the article. The complete article contains detailed analysis, examples, notifications, circulars, case laws, interpretations and practical guidance available to premium members.
This is only a preview of the article. The complete article contains detailed analysis, examples, notifications, circulars, case laws, interpretations and practical guidance available to premium members.
🔒 Premium Content
Subscribe to access complete articles, notifications, circulars, case laws, downloads, videos and premium resources.
Become Premium Member