GST limitation extension notifications face prima facie validity challenge, with interim protection granted against assessment action.

The challenge concerned notifications extending the limitation period under Section 168A of the CGST Act and whether they were prima facie invalid for want of a GST Council recommendation. The Court noted arguable issues on the validity of the later extension notifications, and observed that the challenge to the assessment order under Section 73(9) depended on that validity. Finding a strong prima facie case and noting a similar interim order in another matter, the Court granted protective interim relief restraining further action under the impugned order, with liberty to seek appropriate relief depending on the Supreme Court outcome.

---

---

Issues: Whether the notifications extending time limits under Section 168A of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 were prima facie vulnerable for want of recommendation of the GST Council, and whether interim protection was warranted against action under the assessment order passed under Section 73(9) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.

Analysis: The Court noted that arguable questions arose on the validity of the impugned notifications, including the contention that the later notifications extending limitation were not issued on the recommendation of the GST Council. The Court also noted that the challenge to the assessment order depended on the validity of those notifications. In view of the material placed and the existence of a similar interim order in another matter, the Court found a strong prima facie case for protective relief pending adjudication.

Outcome: Rule issued. Interim relief granted restraining further action in pursuance of the impugned order. Liberty reserved to apply depending on the outcome before the Supreme Court.

---