2024 (6) TMI 229 - HC - GST

Challenge to impugned order u/s 73(9) of C.G.S.T. Act 2017 and show cause notice u/s 73(1) - time limitation for assessment year 2017-18 - HELD THAT - As the ground of challenge is that initiation of the proceedings is beyond the period of limitation as also extended period as the show cause notice was not issued inconsonance in the provisions of Section 73(2) and as such the order is within the jurisdiction and no tax would be levied. No cause is made out at this stage for direction to the petitioner to make any deposit. List on 22.04.2024.

Summary

Issues involved: Challenge to impugned order u/s 73(9) of C.G.S.T. Act 2017 and show cause notice u/s 73(1) on grounds of limitation for assessment year 2017-18.

Judgment Details:

1. The petitioner challenged the impugned order dated 27.12.2023 u/s 73(9) of the C.G.S.T. Act 2017 and the show cause notice dated 28.09.2023 u/s 73(1) on the basis that the period of limitation had expired. The petitioner argued that the impugned show cause notice and order were beyond the limitation period and jurisdiction, citing a notification dated 03.02.2020. The petitioner also contested a notification dated 31.03.2023 issued u/s 168A, claiming it was beyond the powers of the section. Reference was made to similar cases in other High Courts where writ petitions were entertained under similar circumstances.

2. The High Court considered the submissions and noted that the limitation of three years should be calculated from the due date of filing annual returns, not the actual date of filing. The Court observed that there seemed to be merit in the petitioner's argument regarding the due date for limitation purposes. No coercive action was to be taken until the next listing date.

3. The Junior Standing Counsel argued that the order was appealable under the statute, requiring the petitioner to deposit 10% of the disputed amount for filing an appeal. However, the Court held that since the challenge was based on the proceedings being beyond the limitation period, no tax would be levied, and there was no cause for directing the petitioner to make any deposit at that stage.

4. The Court directed the filing of a counter affidavit within four weeks, with a provision for a reply/rejoinder affidavit within two weeks thereafter. The matter was listed for further hearing on 22.04.2024.

*Separate Judgment by Judges: Not Applicable*