2025 (1) TMI 1249

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t the respondent - herein was merely an employee of the Company and he could not have been fastened with the liability of Rs. 3731 Crore. There are no good reason to interfere with the common impugned Orders passed by the High Court - SLP dismissed.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J. B. PARDIWALA And HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN For the Petitioner : Mr. N.Venkataraman, A.S.G. Mr. Gurmeet Sin .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... For the aforesaid reasons, it is clear from the relevant contents of the show cause notice that the basic jurisdictional requirements/ingredients, are nor attracted for issuance of the show cause notice under Section 74 of the COST Act so as to inter alia invoke Section 122(1-A) and Section 137 against the petitioner. Even otherwise, it is ill-conceivable to read and recognize into the provisions .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... uing the show cause notice to the petitioner who is merely an employee, was designed to threaten and pressurize the petitioner." 4. The issue before the High Court was one relating to the interpretation of Section 122(1-A) and Section 137 of the GST Act. 5. The High Court after assigning cogent reasons took the view that the respondent - herein was merely an employee of the Company and he could .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X