HC Sets Aside GST Assessment Order Covering Multiple Financial Years:

HC Sets Aside GST Assessment Order Covering Multiple Financial Years

High Court holds that a single assessment order for multiple tax periods violates Sections 73 & 74 of the GST Act; matter remanded for fresh year-wise assessment

HC Sets Aside Composite GST Assessment Order Covering Multiple Years

authorMeetu KumaridateApr 20, 2026
Last update on Apr 20, 2026
HC Sets Aside GST Assessment Order Covering Multiple Financial Years, Holding It Invalid Under Sections 73 & 74 of the GST Act The petitioner, M/s. Avika Steel Mart, a registered GST entity, was served with an assessment order dated 22.11.2025 covering the period from November 2020 to October 2023. The petitioner challenged the order before the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, primarily contending that a single composite assessment order for multiple financial years is not permissible under the GST law. The petitioner relied on an earlier Division Bench ruling of the same Court which held that a single show-cause notice or assessment order cannot be issued for more than one tax period, whether monthly or yearly, depending on the stage of filing of returns.
Income Tax Deletes Rs 25.79 Crore Tax Demand Raised Against Uniparts India Ltd for AY 2024-25
Main Issue: Whether a single composite assessment order covering multiple tax periods/financial years is valid under Sections 73 and 74 of the GST Act, 2017. HC Decided: The High Court allowed the writ petition on the limited ground that the assessment order was a composite order covering multiple tax periods, which is impermissible in law. Relying on its earlier Division Bench judgment, the Court held that separate assessment proceedings must be undertaken for each relevant tax period.
Wipro Announces Rs 15,000 Crore Share Buyback Plan; Attempt to Provide Relief to Investors
The impugned assessment order dated 22.11.2025 was set aside and the matter was remanded back to the authorities with liberty to initiate fresh proceedings separately for each assessment year. All coercive actions, including recovery proceedings and attachment, were also quashed. The Court clarified that the period between the original order and the present decision shall be excluded for limitation purposes. To Read Full Judgment, Download PDF Given Below

About Author

Meetu Kumari

Content Manager

Meetu Kumari is an Experienced Advocate and Content Writer with 4+ years of demonstrated history of working in the law practice industry. Skilled in Developing Content, Researching, and Drafting. Strong professional with a Bachelor of Science (B.Sc.) focused on Law from Gujarat National Law University.
Studycafe
Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India
2157
Up Next

Loading suggestions…