TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (1) TMI 1454
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s on prayer clauses (c) and (d) of the petition. 2. On 9-1-2025, following order was passed. "Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that affidavit of service is filed. The Registry has not recorded its satisfaction as regards service to respondents. A vague report is filed that petitioner's counsel has filed affidavit of service. The Registry shall examine affidavit and make categorical remark/s as regards service to respondents. This practice shall be followed in all the cases. Registrar (Judicial) shall accordingly, by way instructions, issue circular/office order, as the case may be. Kept back. (JUDGE) (JUDGE.) Later ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e financial year to which the tax not paid or short paid or input tax credit wrongly availed or utilized relates to or within three years from the date of erroneous refund." 21. A perusal of the above stated provisions would show that an order has to be passed by the 'proper officer' within a period of three years from the due date for furnishing the annual retums for the said financial year. For issuance of a show cause notice, at least three months' period prior to the time limit under Section 73(10) of the CGST Act would be available. Thus, the show cause notice has to be issued at least three months prior to the outer limit prescribed for passing of an order under Section 73(10) of the CGST Act. 22. In the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...." 10. In terms of the above decision, the purpose of Section 73(2) of the CGST Act has been clearly held to provide the minimum period of three months to the assessee for filing the reply to the SCN. The three month's period prescribed in Section 73(2) of the CGST Act is mandatory when read with Section 73(10) of the CGST Act." On the similar line, a view is taken by the Division Bench of Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of M/s. The Cotton Corporation of India Vs. Assistant Commissioner St Auditfac and others in Writ Petition No. 1463/2025 on 5-2-2025 wherein the Court held as under :- "13. Another way of looking at this issue is the purpose for which such limitation has been prescribed under the Act. Sec....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ral justice, opportunity of payment of tax etc. and, therefore, time gap of three months should be strictly followed. The argument is that this time gap of three months is applicable to the notices, which are issued well before the time prescribed under sub-section (10) of Section 73 of the CGST Act. Learned Assistant Government Pleader seeks time to have research on the point. Time granted. List on 17-1-2026. Ms. Ketki Jaltare, learned counsel appears for respondent no. 1 and submits that Mrs. Mugdha Chandurkar, learned counsel be relieved. Statement accepted. Registry to note." 3. As could be seen, learned Assistant Government Pleader sought time to have research on the point. Ms. Ketki Jaltare Vaidy....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ieved. The another reason is when there is a possibility of an adverse order being passed against tax payer, the facility of obtaining at least three adjournments for personal hearing etc. will be rendered otiose, if the assessment is to be done within the time lesser than three months which will fall short of giving reasonable opportunity of hearing. Thus, the protection guaranteed under the provisions of the CGST Act will not be extended, if the gap of three months between the issuance of notice and passing final order is not maintained. 5. For the aforesaid reason, we hold that it is mandatory to keep gap of three months between issuance of notice and passing final order under subsection (2) read with sub-section (10) of Section 73 of....