Veremax Technologie Services Limited Vs Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax
Date: September 4, 2024
Subject Matter
Section 73 requires separate notices for each financial year due to different statutory timelines involved
Summary
The Karnataka High Court examined the legality of a single Show Cause Notice (SCN) issued for multiple tax periods ranging from 2017-18 to 2020-21. The petitioner, Veremax Technologies, contested the SCN asserting that Section 73 of the CGST Act requires separate notices for each financial year due to different statutory timelines involved. The Court ruled in favor of the petitioner, emphasizing that issuing a consolidated SCN infringes the provisions of the CGST Act, notably Section 73(10), which mandates that tax assessments must adhere to specific timelines within the respective financial years. The judgment reiterated that tax matters for different periods must be treated independently, consistent with previous legal precedents including a Supreme Court ruling. Consequently, the Court quashed the consolidated SCN but allowed the tax authorities the right to issue separate SCNs for each year, aligning with the legal framework. Thus, the Court affirmed that the principles of taxation require actions to be completed within their designated periods, reinforcing the statutory requirement for independent assessments of separate financial years.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
In this petition, petitioner challenges the impugned show cause notice dated 03.05.2024 at Annexure – D and the order dated 21.11.2023 at Annexure – B issued by the respondent for the tax periods 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20 and 2020-21. The petitioner contends that these notices, issued under Section 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act, 2017, are flawed due to the improper consolidation of multiple tax periods into a single show cause notice.
2. The petitioner’s primary argument is that the respondent cannot issue a common show cause notice by grouping the tax periods from 2017-18 to 2020-21. The petitioner asserts that under Section 73 of the CGST Act, a specific action must be completed within the relevant year, and the limitation period of three years applies separately to each assessment year. Consequently, the petitioner contends that clubbing multiple tax periods in a single notice is impermissible, and separate notices should have been issued for each assessment year under sub-Section (1) of Section 73.
3. The petitioner relies on the judgment of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of M/s. Titan Company Ltd. vs. Joint Commissioner of GST1. The Madras High Court, while addressing a similar issue, relied on the Hon’ble Supreme Court’s decision in State of Jammu and Kashmir and Others vs. Caltex (India) Ltd.,2. The Hon’ble Apex Court held that where an assessment encompasses different assessment years, each assessment order can be distinctly separated and must be treated independently.
4. This Court has reviewed the judgment of the Madras High Court and the scope of inquiry under Section 73 of the CGST Act. Based on the established legal principles and the precedent set by the Hon’ble Apex Court, this Court finds that the respondent erred in issuing a consolidated show cause notice for multiple assessment years, spanning from 2017-18 to 2020-21.
5. Section 73(10) of the CGST Act mandates a specific time limit from the due date for furnishing the annual return for the financial year to which the tax due relates. The law stipulates that particular actions must be completed within a designated year, and such actions should be executed in accordance with the law’s provisions. The principles enunciated in the judgment cited by the Hon’ble Supreme Court are directly applicable to the present case.
6. For the reasons aforementioned, this Court concludes that the show cause notices issued by the respondent are fundamentally flawed. The practice of issuing a single, consolidated show cause notice for multiple assessment years contravenes the provisions of the CGST Act and established legal precedents.
7. Accordingly, this Court proceeds to pass the following:
ORDER
(i) The writ petition is
(ii) The impugned show cause notice dated 03.05.2024 (Annexure-D) issued by the respondent for the tax periods 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20 and 202021 are hereby quashed;
(iii) This order, however, does not preclude the respondent from issuing separate show cause notices for each assessment year in compliance with Section 73 of the CGST Act, 2017.