GST limitation and extended period principles support Section 74 proceedings where Covid-19 exclusions and suppression-like facts are present

Limitation under the GST enactments was treated as extended by exclusion of the Covid-19 period and by operation of Section 168A and related notifications/orders, so proceedings under Section 74 were not time-barred. The dispute involved a GSTR-2A and GSTR-3B mismatch suggesting excess input tax credit, and the prior scrutiny under Section 61, including an ASMT-10 notice before intimation and show-cause notice, was treated as indicative of suppression-like circumstances. On that basis, invocation of the extended period under Section 74 was upheld as sustainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether the proceedings and impugned order under Section 74 of the GST enactments were barred by limitation and whether the invocation of the extended period was sustainable.

Analysis: The dispute arose from a mismatch between GSTR-2A and GSTR-3B, leading to an allegation of excess input tax credit. The Court noted that for the relevant tax period, the ordinary limitation under Section 73 had been extended by the exclusion of the Covid-19 period and by the operation of Section 168A and the relevant notifications/orders. It also noticed that the returns had been scrutinised under Section 61 and that an ASMT-10 notice had preceded the intimation and show-cause notice, indicating suppression-like circumstances sufficient to justify resort to Section 74.

Conclusion: The proceedings were not time-barred and the invocation of Section 74 was upheld.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the limitation period stands extended by statutory and judicial exclusion of the Covid-19 period and the record indicates suppression or similar non-disclosure, proceedings under Section 74 of the GST enactments are not barred by limitation.

---