Singing of order

[BRAJESH GOYAL]

A consolidated Order in Original for 6 years signed by the Joint Commissioner of Central GST under section 74 of CGST Act, 2017. However, the Form DRC-07 by Superintendent. The demand amount is more than 10 lakh for each year. Whether DRC 07 signed by the Superintendent? Refer CBIC circular No. 31/05/2018 – GST (F. No. 349/75/2017-GST)

[Sadanand Bulbule]

Single notice/order under Section 73/74 for multiple years is not sustainable. For more details, refer the following ruling:

2024 (12) TMI 656 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT - M/S. ALBATROSS BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS LLP, VERSUS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX (A.E) , BENGALURU.

Challenge to SCN and summary of SCN issued by the respondent u/s 74 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, for several financial years - case of the petitioner is that the respondent could not have issued one single notice for the entire period between January-2018 and August-2022 - Whether the respondent can issue one show cause notice for several financial years? - HELD THAT:- The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, while examining the similar situation in M/S. VEREMAX TECHNOLOGIE SERVICES LIMITED VERSUS THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX BENGALURU. [2024 (9) TMI 1347 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] has held 'This Court has reviewed the judgment of the Madras High Court and the scope of inquiry under Section 73 of the CGST Act. Based on the established legal principles and the precedent set by the Hon'ble Apex Court, this Court finds that the respondent erred in issuing a consolidated show cause notice for multiple assessment years, spanning from 2017-18 to 2020-21.'

Though in the summary of the show cause notice there is segregation of the liability in respect of each financial year, in the light of the judgment of the Coordinate Bench of this Court and for the reasons stated above, it does not come to the rescue of the respondent. Thus, it is appropriate to set aside the impugned show cause notices, reserving the liberty to the respondent to issue appropriate show cause notices for each financial year and proceed against the petitioner.

The show cause notice issued by the respondent (vide Annexure-A) to the writ petition is hereby set aside - the summary of the SCN issued by the respondent (vide Annexure-B) to the writ petition is hereby set aside - Petition disposed off.

[Sadanand Bulbule]

Refer this also:

2025 (3) TMI 836 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT - M/S. PANJON LIMITED VERSUS COMMISSIONER CGST AND CENTRAL EXCISE

[Ganeshan Kalyani]

Whether the demand raised is acceptable to you? or you object them? 

[KASTURI SETHI]

2025 (1) TMI 518 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT - M/S. RIOCARE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED VERSUS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER CGST AND C. EX. & ORS.

 

[BRAJESH GOYAL]

My question is whether DRC-07 can be signed by the Superintendent where the demand amount is more than 10 lakh. In this case, the assistant commissioner signs the reasoning order/speaking order.  So the summary as below:

1. Speakign order signed by AC

2. DRC-07 to the speaking order is signed by Superintendent

Whether it is allowed. 

AI Summary

GST Order Under Section 74 Challenges Procedural Validity of Consolidated Tax Demand Spanning Multiple Financial Years A consolidated GST order spanning 6 years was issued by a Joint Commissioner under section 74 of CGST Act, with a demand exceeding 10 lakh per year. The key issue is whether a Superintendent can sign the DRC-07 form when the reasoning order is signed by an Assistant Commissioner. Recent high court rulings suggest that consolidated notices for multiple financial years may not be legally sustainable, indicating potential procedural irregularities in the tax demand process.