TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
Though the GSTAT is operational as on date enabling the affected taxpayer to file the appeals online, the delay of more than 8 years in making this possible has led to flooding of writs before various jurisdictional high courts. High Courts have slowly started suggesting appeal remedy by rejecting the writs as per recent trend. Wherever the order passed by adjudicating officer or orders at both adjudication as well as first appeal levels happens to be bad, in several cases the orders are set aside or even quashed.
Unfortunately, despite thousands of orders having been quashed all over India by various high courts so far, the GST Council or CBIC have not come till now with strong instructions to stop this undesired situation. When things were bad, articles were published under the series know your limits under GST highlighting the errors noticed by the high courts. When things were turning bad to worse, it was strongly reemphasized that the GST law is binding on GST officials as well. However, the things have gone from worse to worst and as a GST professional, who is interested in spreading awareness on GST provisions amongst all concerned is prompted to write on the above topic.
Till 2025, cases of wrong application of section 73 or 74 as well as 129 and 130 were handled in large numbers by various jurisdictional high courts and the taxpayers were getting required relief in all deserving cases. The Madurai bench of the Madras High Court on 19/01/2026 expressed unhappiness on the non-applicability of mind by the jurisdictional tax officer in W P (MD) No 698 of 2026 in the matter of Tvl. Shot X Retail Private Limited Versus State Tax Officer (ST), Karur - 2026 (1) TMI 1392 - MADRAS HIGH COURT.
The officer has erred on three issues. The first one was to issue a common SCN as well as to pass one single order covering 3 full financial years as well part of the current financial year. This has been done so invoking the provisions of Section 73, even though the Section 73 is to be invoked only up to 31/03/2024.
The second error is to cover the current financial year in a hurried manner even though it is absolutely possible to cover the full financial year based on the annual return. For this, time is available for issuing the SCN till 30/06/2030 for which further twelve months available to pass the order from date of issuing the SCN as covered in 74A.
The third error is issuing SCN under 73 for the financial year 2024-25 as well as for part of current financial year which is impermissible in law as Section 74A is operational since 01/04/2024.
A small taxpayer unaware of the differences between 73, 74 and 74A is acceptable whereas lack of strong awareness on these three sections by a state tax officer who is vested with powers to raise huge demand on taxpayer is totally unacceptable.
The operative portion of the order is reproduced for creating awareness amongst all GST officials whose orders have so far been quashed later by the High Courts.
7. In reply, the learned Additional Government Pleader had fairly confirmed all the submissions made by the respondent and requests this Court to pass appropriate orders.
10. Yet another aspect raised by the petitioner is with regard to the issuance of notice under Section 73 of the GST Act for the Financial Years 2024-25 & 2025-26. As rightly contended by the petitioner, the provisions of Sections 73 & 74 of the GST Act stood omitted with effect from 01.04.2024 and only the provisions of Section 74A of the GST Act will apply from the financial years 2024-2025 onwards. Hence, it is clear that the impugned order came to be passed by the respondent in total non-application of mind. In such view of the matter, this Court is inclined to quash the impugned order passed by the respondent on this aspect also
11. In view of the above, this Court passes the following order:
(i) The impugned assessment order dated 15.12.2025 and all the other consequential orders are quashed.
(ii) Further, the show cause notice dated 27.10.2025 is set aside and the respondents are granted liberty to initiate separate proceedings, against the petitioner, for each financial year.
12. With the above directions, this writ petition is disposed of. No cost. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is also closed.
Incidentally, Section 73 which mandates a short time limit is done away from 01/04/2024 and the adjudicating authorities may allow sufficient time to taxpayers for reply as well as submissions during hearing as Section 74A has been drafted in excellent manner to cover all issues arose under 73 or 74 in the past.
It is appealed to all concerned that there should be some sensitivity at top level to minimise the incidences of wrong invocation of sections which subsequently result in quashing the order by a higher court at a later date.