Just a moment...

Report
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
+ Post an Article
Post a New Article
Title :
0/200 char
Description :
Max 0 char
Category :
Co Author :

In case of Co-Author, You may provide Username as per TMI records

Delete Reply

Are you sure you want to delete your reply beginning with '' ?

Delete Issue

Are you sure you want to delete your Issue titled: '' ?

Articles

Back

All Articles

Advanced Search
Reset Filters
Search By:
Search by Text :
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms
Select Date:
FromTo
Category :
- 0 - Views

“REASONABLE TIME" IN INDIRECT TAX CASES: WHEN NO SPECIFIC LIMITATION IS PRESCRIBED

Date 04 Jun 2025
Tax Authorities Must Issue Show Cause Notices Within Three Years to Ensure Fair and Timely Administrative Proceedings
In indirect tax cases involving customs, excise, and service tax, the Supreme Court established a three-year reasonable time limit for issuing show cause notices when no specific statutory limitation exists. The court consistently upheld lower court decisions quashing notices issued 5-10 years after assessment periods, emphasizing the need for timely administrative actions and rejecting delayed governmental interventions. This judicial interpretation aims to reduce litigation and ensure fairness in tax proceedings. - (AI Summary)

In indirect taxation—particularly under laws like the Goods and Services Tax (GST), Customs, Central Excise, or Service Tax—limitation periods are crucial in determining the legality and fairness of administrative actions. But what happens when no specific time limit is laid down for an action, such as issuing a show cause notice or making an adjudication?

Often the authorities, to overcome audit objections from the C&AG, issue notices or even without issuing notices issue orders and force the party to pay the amount confirmed. The only remedy to the party is to approach the High Court with a writ petition. One such case was the subject matter before the Hon’ble High Court of Punjab & Haryana when an exporter, M/s Venus Apparels questioned the appropriateness of issuing a SCN after 6-10 years after assessment period. The Hon’ble Court in  M/S VENUS APPARELS AND OTHERS VERSUS PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, INLAND CONTAINER DEPOT, TUGHLAKABAD (EXPORT), NEW DELHI AND ANOTHER - 2024 (8) TMI 1556 - PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT followed the ratio laid down by the Apex Court in UNION OF INDIA & ANR. VERSUS M/S. ASIA EXPORTERS & ORS. - 2024 (8) TMI 678 - SC ORDER, refused to intervene against High Court order reported at RAGHAV INTERNATIONAL THROUGH PROPRIETOR VISHAL BHARATBHUSHAN JAIN & OTHERS VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ANR. - 2023 (2) TMI 954 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT wherein High Court had quashed SCNs issued after 5-10 years from relevant assessment years by holding that no limitation was prescribed by Rule 16 of Customs, Central Excise Duties and Service Tax Drawback Rules, 1995; hence, show cause notice had to be issued within reasonable period of three year and decided the case.

 Against the said judgment the department had filed a special leave petition before the Apex Court in PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS & ANR. VERSUS M/S VENUS APPARELS & ORS. - 2025 (5) TMI 177 - SC ORDER The Apex Court dismissed the Appeal by the following order-Quote:

Following the order dated 19.10.2023 passed in Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No.39206 of 2023 (UNION OF INDIA & ANR. VERSUS M/S ASIA EXPORTERS & ORS. - 2023 (10) TMI 1435 - SC ORDER,) this Special Leave Petition also stands dismissed.

3. For ease of reference, the order dated 19.10.2023 in the aforesaid case is extracted as under:

"Delay in filing the special leave petition is condoned.

Having heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the respondent(s)-caveator, we find that this special leave petition arises out of Special Civil Application No.10699 of 2021 wherein, the period of assessment was 2011-2016. In respect of the said period, the date of issuance of the show cause notice is 24.03.2021 which means that the show cause notice was issued 5 to 10 years thereafter. There is no explanation whatsoever for the delay in issuance of notices to the respondents-herein.

In the circumstances, a challenge made to the show cause notices before the High Court was successful inasmuch as the action of the respondent authority was held to be belated and hit by delay and latches. Consequently, the show cause notices were quashed. We do not think that the impugned order would call for any interference in this case.

Hence, the special leave petition is dismissed-Unquote.

The question of reasonableness in issuing a Notice, when no limitation is prescribed in the statute is well settled by the Apex court by accepting a period of three years within which a notice need to be issued where no limitation is prescribed statutorily as in the case of Rule 16   of Customs, Central Excise Duties and Service Tax Drawback Rules, 1995. 

The Special leave petition in this case is against the policy of Government to reduce the litigation when a similar case was decided by the Apex Court. In the present case the same order is reproduced.

One can reasonably presume that the  department will refrain from issuing Notices beyond a period of three years where there is no statutory limitation is prescribed or at least refrain from filing SLPs in the same matter.   

------

By Jayaprakash Gopinathan

Advocate 

0 answers
Sort by
+ Add A New Reply
Hide

No Replies are present for this Article

Recent Articles