https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=792998 The Madras HC held that invocation of Section 74 was valid where the authority had recorded, after considering the reply, that the defects and omissions in the annual returns were wilful; that factual determination was not open to writ review under Article 226. It also rejected the challenge based on the show cause notice being issued three months before the assessment order, treating the timing requirement as aimed at securing a fair opportunity to respond, not as an automatic ground to invalidate proceedings. As the petitioner had filed a detailed reply with supporting documents and it was considered, the writ petitions failed and the petitioner was left to pursue the statutory appellate remedy. en-us Thu, 29 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 06 Jun 2026 08:42:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=792998 The Madras HC held that invocation of Section 74 was valid where the authority had recorded, after considering the reply, that the defects and omissions in the annual returns were wilful; that factual determination was not open to writ review under Article 226. It also rejected the challenge based on the show cause notice being issued three months before the assessment order, treating the timing requirement as aimed at securing a fair opportunity to respond, not as an automatic ground to invalidate proceedings. As the petitioner had filed a detailed reply with supporting documents and it was considered, the writ petitions failed and the petitioner was left to pursue the statutory appellate remedy. Case-Laws GST Thu, 29 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=792998