2025 (1) TMI 1426 - HC - GST

Challenge to SCN issued u/s 74 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act 2017 - it is conceded by the petitioner that the adjudication proceedings are going on and petitioner is being granted an opportunity of cross-examination - HELD THAT - Since the adjudication proceedings have already commenced pursuant to the show cause notice and the reply notice the latter of which was issued almost five months ago there is no reason for this Court to direct the adjudication officer the manner in which the adjudication proceedings should be conducted. If at all the petitioner is aggrieved by the order that may be passed pursuant to Exhibit-P1 certainly the statute provides appropriate remedies. As the proceedings have already commenced and the petitioner has been granted an opportunity for cross-examination as well exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is not warranted in the instant case. Petition dismissed.

Summary

**Summary of the Kerala High Court Judgment:**In the case before the Kerala High Court, presided over by Honourable Mr. Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas, the petitioner, a company, challenged a composite show cause notice issued under Section 74 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. This notice covered multiple financial years from 2017-18 to 2022-23. The petitioner sought separate orders for each financial year, additional time to respond for 2018-19 to 2023-24, and an opportunity for a personal hearing and cross-examination.The court noted that the petitioner had already been granted an opportunity for cross-examination and that adjudication proceedings were ongoing. The petitioner expressed concerns about potentially not receiving an effective hearing and the possibility of a composite order being issued. However, the court found no irregularity in the show cause notice, referencing a prior decision in W.P.(C). No.35156 of 2024, which addressed the issue of composite notices.The court concluded that there was no need to exercise jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and dismissed the writ petition. The petitioner was advised to pursue statutory remedies if aggrieved by the final adjudication order.