Gauhati High Court Upholds Validity of Consolidated GST SCN Covering Multiple Financial Years in matter of Tata Projects:

The Gauhati High Court has held that there is no prohibition under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 against issuance of a consolidated show cause notice covering multiple financial years.
No Statutory Bar Under CGST Act for Issuance of Common Notices for Different Financial Years

Gauhati High Court Upholds Validity of Consolidated GST SCN Covering Multiple Financial Years in matter of Tata Projects
The Gauhati High Court has ruled that a proper officer under the CGST Act, 2017 possesses the jurisdiction to issue a common show cause notice covering more than one financial year, provided that the proceedings for each year are initiated within the limitation period prescribed under Sections 73(2) and 74(2) of the Act.
There is a batch of writ petitions filed by Tata Projects Limited, Quantum Infratech and Bitchem Asphalt Technologies Limited that challenged the maintainability of proceedings initiated through consolidated show cause notices. The main argument of the petitioners was that every financial year constitutes a distinct unit under the GST framework and, therefore, separate notices should have been issued for each year.
The petitioners contended that returns are filed separately for each tax period and annual returns are to be furnished financial year-wise under Sections 39 and 44 of the CGST Act. It was further contended that the limitation prescribed under Sections 73(10) and 74(10) is calculated independently for every financial year and clubbing several years in one notice is contrary to the statutory scheme. On the other hand, the Revenue submitted that Sections 73(1), 73(3), 74(1) and 74(3) contain phrases such as "for any period" and "for such periods," which indicate that the legislature intended to permit consolidated proceedings.
After examining the entire statutory framework, the court observed that Sections 73 and 74 do not expressly mandate issuance of a separate notice for each financial year. The Court held that the cause of action to apply these provisions arises from non-payment, short payment, erroneous refund or wrongful availment of input tax credit and not from the financial year itself. The Court further noted that Sections 73(2) and 74(2) merely impose restrictions regarding timelines for issuance of notices, however, Sections 73(10) and 74(10) prescribe the outer limit for passing adjudication orders. These provisions do not prohibit a consolidated notice or a common adjudication order covering several financial years.
Accordingly, the High Court thus rejected the jurisdictional challenge raised by the petitioners and held that common notices and common orders covering different financial years are legally permissible under Sections 73 and 74 of the CGST Act, 2017.
About Author
Saima
Content Writer
Saima is a Law graduate with a passion for research and content writing. She writes for Finance, Taxation and Legal Updates at Studycafe.in, simplifying complex legal decisions by the ITAT, High Court, AAR and GSTAT into uncomplicated and clear explanations.
Saima is a Law graduate with a passion for research and content writing. She writes for Finance, Taxation and Legal Updates at Studycafe.in, simplifying complex legal decisions by the ITAT, High Court, AAR and GSTAT into uncomplicated and clear explanations.
StudyCafe
Delhi, Delhi, India
306My Recent Articles
- ITAT Pune Holds Digital Marketing and IT Expenses as Revenue ExpenditurePremium
- ITAT Pune Upholds Company's Depreciation on Goodwill and ESOP Expense DeductionPremium
- ITAT Holds Interest Income from Co-operative Bank Investments Eligible for Deduction Under Section 80P(2)(d)Premium
- ITAT Holds Notice Issued After 31 March 2022 As Beyond Six-Year Limitation PeriodPremium
- ITAT Pune Allows Higher Section 80P Deduction on Enhanced Business Profits of Cooperative SocietyPremium
Up Next
Loading suggestions…
Recent Posts
All Posts
Recent Posts
All Posts







