Facts: The petitioner challenges an order dated 07.06.2022, which raised a demand of Rs. 49,26,623/- under Section 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. Prior to the order, a Show Cause Notice was issued, but it lacked specific allegations and was unsigned. The court finds the order dated 07.06.2022 invalid due to the absence of a signature. However, the Show Cause Notice remains valid, and the petitioner is granted a two-week period to file a reply to the notice.
Decision: The order dated 07.06.2022 is set aside due to the absence of a signature, rendering it invalid. The Show Cause Notice, despite lacking specific allegations, is deemed valid. The petitioner is given two weeks to file a reply to the Show Cause Notice. The concerned authority is directed to pass a fresh order after considering the petitioner's reply and providing an opportunity for a hearing. The petition and pending applications are disposed of in light of the above decisions.

Facts: The petitioner challenges an order dated 07.06.2022, which raised a demand of Rs. 49,26,623/- under Section 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. Prior to the order, a Show Cause Notice was issued, but it lacked specific allegations and was unsigned. The court finds the order dated 07.06.2022 invalid due to the absence of a signature. However, the Show Cause Notice remains valid, and the petitioner is granted a two-week period to file a reply to the notice.
Decision: The order dated 07.06.2022 is set aside due to the absence of a signature, rendering it invalid. The Show Cause Notice, despite lacking specific allegations, is deemed valid. The petitioner is given two weeks to file a reply to the Show Cause Notice. The concerned authority is directed to pass a fresh order after considering the petitioner's reply and providing an opportunity for a hearing. The petition and pending applications are disposed of in light of the above decisions.

Facts: The petitioner challenges an order dated 07.06.2022, which raised a demand of Rs. 49,26,623/- under Section 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. Prior to the order, a Show Cause Notice was issued, but it lacked specific allegations and was unsigned. The court finds the order dated 07.06.2022 invalid due to the absence of a signature. However, the Show Cause Notice remains valid, and the petitioner is granted a two-week period to file a reply to the notice.
Decision: The order dated 07.06.2022 is set aside due to the absence of a signature, rendering it invalid. The Show Cause Notice, despite lacking specific allegations, is deemed valid. The petitioner is given two weeks to file a reply to the Show Cause Notice. The concerned authority is directed to pass a fresh order after considering the petitioner's reply and providing an opportunity for a hearing. The petition and pending applications are disposed of in light of the above decisions.

Facts: The petitioner challenges an order dated 07.06.2022, which raised a demand of Rs. 49,26,623/- under Section 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. Prior to the order, a Show Cause Notice was issued, but it lacked specific allegations and was unsigned. The court finds the order dated 07.06.2022 invalid due to the absence of a signature. However, the Show Cause Notice remains valid, and the petitioner is granted a two-week period to file a reply to the notice.
Decision: The order dated 07.06.2022 is set aside due to the absence of a signature, rendering it invalid. The Show Cause Notice, despite lacking specific allegations, is deemed valid. The petitioner is given two weeks to file a reply to the Show Cause Notice. The concerned authority is directed to pass a fresh order after considering the petitioner's reply and providing an opportunity for a hearing. The petition and pending applications are disposed of in light of the above decisions.

Facts: The petitioner challenges an order dated 07.06.2022, which raised a demand of Rs. 49,26,623/- under Section 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. Prior to the order, a Show Cause Notice was issued, but it lacked specific allegations and was unsigned. The court finds the order dated 07.06.2022 invalid due to the absence of a signature. However, the Show Cause Notice remains valid, and the petitioner is granted a two-week period to file a reply to the notice.
Decision: The order dated 07.06.2022 is set aside due to the absence of a signature, rendering it invalid. The Show Cause Notice, despite lacking specific allegations, is deemed valid. The petitioner is given two weeks to file a reply to the Show Cause Notice. The concerned authority is directed to pass a fresh order after considering the petitioner's reply and providing an opportunity for a hearing. The petition and pending applications are disposed of in light of the above decisions.

Facts: The petitioner challenges an order dated 07.06.2022, which raised a demand of Rs. 49,26,623/- under Section 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. Prior to the order, a Show Cause Notice was issued, but it lacked specific allegations and was unsigned. The court finds the order dated 07.06.2022 invalid due to the absence of a signature. However, the Show Cause Notice remains valid, and the petitioner is granted a two-week period to file a reply to the notice.
Decision: The order dated 07.06.2022 is set aside due to the absence of a signature, rendering it invalid. The Show Cause Notice, despite lacking specific allegations, is deemed valid. The petitioner is given two weeks to file a reply to the Show Cause Notice. The concerned authority is directed to pass a fresh order after considering the petitioner's reply and providing an opportunity for a hearing. The petition and pending applications are disposed of in light of the above decisions.