2026 (3) TMI 1136 - HC - GST

Consolidation of assessment periods upheld; writ relief refused where statutory appeal remedy is available in tax proceedings.

Whether multiple financial years may be consolidated into a single notice under Sections 73 and 74 was answered by applying the precedent accepting ... Writ jurisdiction - Scope of Sections 73 and 74 - Availability of an efficacious alternative remedy by way of appeal under Section 107 - fraudulent availment of input tax credit - Validity of Consolidation of multiple financial years in notices under sections 73/74 - classification of supply and rate of tax. Alternative statutory remedy - HELD THAT:- The Court declined to enter into the merits of whether fraud was made out because an alternative remedy by way of appeal under Section 107 of the CGST Act and Rule 109A of the CGST Rules was available and not exhausted. The Court applied settled principle that where an efficacious statutory remedy exists, the writ jurisdiction ought not to be invoked to decide substantive issues appropriate for the statutory appellate forum, and accordingly refrained from adjudicating the factual/legal merits. [Paras 19, 26] The Court refused to examine the merits in writ proceedings and left the petitioner free to pursue the statutory appellate remedy. Consolidation of multiple financial years in notices under sections 73/74 - HELD THAT: - The Court held itself bound by the decision in Ambika Traders [2025 (9) TMI 1338 - SC ORDER] which accepts that the language of Sections 73 and 74 permits issuance of notices covering more than one financial year and contemplated consolidation where the statutory language permits a notice 'for any period' or 'for such periods'. The Court rejected the petitioner's submission that Ambika Traders is confined to fraud-ITC cases and declined to follow divergent views of other High Courts, noting the binding effect of the earlier decision and that pendency of proceedings elsewhere did not justify deviation. [Paras 21, 22, 23, 24, 25] The Court upheld the principle that consolidation of multiple years in show-cause notices under Sections 73/74 is permissible and found no ground to interfere with the impugned order on that basis. Final Conclusion: The writ petition was dismissed; the Court declined to adjudicate merits in view of the available statutory appeal and, applying Ambika Traders, approved consolidation of multiple financial years in the impugned proceedings while granting liberty to the petitioner to pursue remedies in accordance with law. Issues: Whether the adjudicating authority could consolidate multiple financial years into a single show cause notice and adjudicate them together and whether the writ court should quash the Order-in-Original dated 31.01.2025 impugning such consolidation.Analysis: The Court considered the scope of Sections 73 and 74 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the binding effect of the earlier decision in Ambika Traders which accepts issuance and consolidation of notices for multiple periods under the language 'for any period' and 'for such periods' in those provisions. The Court noted that it would not enter into the merits of alleged fraud or determine whether fraudulent availment of input tax credit exists, emphasising that such merits fall within the statutory appellate framework. The availability of an efficacious alternative remedy by way of appeal under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 read with Rule 109A of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, and the principle that writ jurisdiction should not ordinarily be invoked to bypass that statutory remedy, was applied. The Court also observed that decisions of coordinate Benches departing from Ambika Traders did not relieve it from following the earlier binding decision, and that the pendency of matters before the Supreme Court did not displace the binding precedent.Conclusion: The Court declined to interfere with the Order-in-Original dated 31.01.2025; consolidation of multiple financial years for the purposes of issuing notices and statements under Sections 73 and 74 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 is permissible as contemplated by Ambika Traders; the writ petition is dismissed and the petitioner is granted liberty to pursue the prescribed statutory remedies.