2026 (3) TMI 295

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e value, and thereby made short payments of Central Goods and Service Tax. 3] The argument is that clubbing of period, while issuing notice under Section 74 of the CGST Act, is not permissible. The Counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue involved is covered by a judgment passed by the Division Bench of this Court at Goa in M/s. Milroc Good Earth Developers Vs. Union of India & Ors. [Writ Petition No. 2203/2025 decided on 9/10/2025], wherein, the Court held that if an authority lacks jurisdiction to have composite assessment for different tax periods/assessment years, then the formality of responding to show cause notice shall not be encouraged. While doing so, the Court considered relevant provisions of the CGST Act, and held a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....eous Return. Thus, there is limitation prescribed for demand of tax and its recovery. The Act of 2017, therefore involve a definite tax period, based on the filing of the Return, which can be either monthly or annual Return and if the assessment is based on annual Return, the tax period shall be the relevant financial year. In the light of the statutory scheme, we find that there is no scope for consolidating various financial years/tax period which is attempted by the impugned Show Cause Notices assailed in the Petition." 4] As could be seen, the Division Bench has, in categorical terms, held that there is no scope for consolidating various financial years/tax period while issuing show cause notice under Section 74 of ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ible. She referred to the judgment of the Division Bench of the High Court of Delhi in M/s Mathur Polymers Vs. Union of India & Ors. [W.P.(C) 2394/2025 decided on 26/8/2025], wherein, the Court referred to its earlier judgment, and held as under : "22. Thus, this Court is of the opinion that in cases involving allegations of fraudulent availment of ITC, where the transactions are spread across several years, a consolidated notice may in fact be required in such cases in order to establish the illegal modality adopted by such businesses and entities. The language of the legislation, itself, does not prevent issuance of SCN or order for multiple years in a consolidated manner." 10] The Counsel for respondent no. 1 submits that the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d with different due dates and different limitations, which the statute does not permit. IV] Tax period is defined (Section 2(106) of the CGST Act) as the period, for which the return is required to be furnished. Return can be monthly or yearly, but the statute treats each financial year as a separate tax period for the purpose of assessment and recovery (Sections 39, 44, 37, 50, etc.). V] Time limit operate year by year. Section 73(10) and 74(10) of the CGST Act fix the time limit to issue an assessment order within three years (Section 73) or five years (Section 74) from the last date for filing annual return for the year to which the tax dues relate. VI] Consolidation would collapse these years, specific steps ....