Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether a composite show cause notice covering multiple financial years under Section 74(1) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 could be dealt with by a single order, and whether the petitioner was entitled to separate orders, time to reply for the later years, and an opportunity of hearing.
Analysis: A composite order for several financial years was held to be legally improper. Since proceedings for one financial year had already culminated, separate orders were required for each of the remaining financial years covered by the notice. For the years for which replies had already been filed, the authority was directed to proceed in accordance with law and pass separate orders. For the later years, the petitioner was granted one month to file a reply, after which separate orders could be passed. The authority was also directed to grant an opportunity of hearing.
Conclusion: The petitioner succeeded to the extent of obtaining separate determination year-wise, time to respond for the pending years, and a personal hearing; the show cause proceedings were not quashed.
Ratio Decidendi: Under Section 74(1) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, tax determination must be made separately for each financial year, and a composite order covering multiple years is impermissible.