2026-VIL-1104-DEL
  1. Home
  2. 2026-VIL-1104-DEL

SGST High Court Cases

GST - Constitutional validity of Section 93(1)(b) of the CGST Act, 2017, Construction of Section 93 of the CGST Act - Proceedings for determination of penalty against a legal representative after the death of the person alleged to have committed the contravention – Issue of Show Cause Notice more than three years after the death of the petitioner's husband, proposing penalty under Section 122(3)(a) for his alleged acts and invoking Section 93 against the petitioner as his legal representative - Whether the expression "is determined after his death" in Section 93(1) permits commencement of fresh proceedings after death, or is confined to completion of proceedings already commenced during the deceased's lifetime - HELD - Section 93 contemplates a liability, including penalty, which is "determined after his death", and its concluding words distinguish a liability determined before death but remaining unpaid from one determined thereafter, without making a notice during the deceased's lifetime a condition precedent to the latter determination - The opening words "where a person, liable to pay tax, interest or penalty under this Act, dies" cannot be confined to a liability already quantified before death, since the provision itself contemplates the liability being determined thereafter, provided it arises from conduct attributable to the deceased under the substantive provisions of the Act - Investigation and adjudication are distinct stages, and the fact that investigation had commenced and a statement was recorded during the deceased's lifetime does not itself constitute the source of the power to proceed after death; that authority is found in Section 93 itself - Section 93 must be kept distinct from Section 122(3)(a), which supplies the substantive penalty. Section 93 is not an independent penal provision against the legal representative but enables liability arising under the substantive provisions to be determined and enforced through the legal representative, subject to the conditions of clause (a) or (b), with liability under clause (b) confined to the estate of the deceased to the extent it is capable of meeting the charge - The Show Cause Notice is not without jurisdiction solely because it was issued after death. The lapse of time after death does not by itself create a bar under Section 93, without prejudice to any applicable limitation requirements - The Petitioner is granted liberty to institute an appeal under Section 107 of the CGST Act against the impugned order – The petition is disposed of - GST - Constitutional validity of Section 93(1)(b) of the CGST Act, 2017 - Challenge to Section 93(1)(b), insofar as it permits determination of penalty against a legal representative after the death of the person alleged to have committed the contravention, as arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution, on the ground that a legal representative cannot meaningfully answer allegations concerning matters within the personal knowledge of a person no longer alive - HELD - The provision preserves liabilities attributable to the deceased's lifetime conduct for lawful determination and satisfaction from his estate, and the resulting distinction bears a direct relation to the statutory purpose; Section 93 does not deem the representative to have committed the alleged wrong, and clause (b) confines payment to the estate's capacity to meet the charge, with the underlying contravention and conditions of representative liability still required to be established by the Adjudicating Authority - Section 126(3) of the Act requires an effective opportunity of hearing, under which the representative must receive the relied-upon material and be permitted to contest the alleged contravention - These safeguards answer the contention that Section 93 confers unguided power or necessarily denies a defence; that a particular adjudication may fail for want of evidence or a fair opportunity does not establish that every determination after death must be unfair - The statutory purpose, representative procedure and limitation of liability to estate assets provide a rational basis for the provision, which is neither discriminatory nor manifestly arbitrary, and the Constitutional challenge to Section 93(1)(b) is rejected.
Download File

Quick Search

/

Advance Search

GST Resources

/

Gst Rate Finder

Weekly Summary

VIL Video

GST & Customs updates: Sep'26
By CA Vivek Jalan

Create Account

Security-Code
New Code?

Log In

New User ? Forgot Password ?

Forgot Password

Security-Code
New Code?
Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page

Security-Code
New Code?

Feedback this page

Schedule a Demo

Schedule a demo to know the features and advantages of VILGST portal. Get to know the tips to find the desired results in faster way.

Security-Code
New Code?

Caselaw Request Form (CRF)

Didn’t find what you are searching for? No worries, please give us the following details and VIL will email you the desired Caselaws at the earliest:

Security-Code
New Code?