Tvl. Voylla Fashions Private Limited Vs Assistant Commissioner (ST) (FAC)
Date: December 16, 2025
Subject Matter
Notifications curtailing limitation period vitiated and illegal
Summary
The Madras High Court set aside Notification No. 09/2023-Central Tax dated 31.03.2023 and Notification No.56/2023-Central Tax dated 28.12.2023, along with the consequential order dated 28.08.2024, holding them vitiated and illegal. The Court found that these notifications arbitrarily curtailed the extended period of limitation granted by the Supreme Court under Article 142 of the Constitution, which was contrary to Section 168A of the CGST Act.
Summary of Facts and Dispute:
- Impugned Action: The specific action challenged was the issuance of Notification No. 09/2023-Central Tax dated 31.03.2023 and Notification No.56/2023-Central Tax dated 28.12.2023, and a consequential order dated 28.08.2024, which effectively curtailed the limitation period for GST authorities.
- Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner implicitly argued that the impugned notifications were illegal as they diminished the extended limitation period provided by the Supreme Court's order under Article 142, and were based on erroneous legal assumptions and arbitrary in nature, thereby extinguishing vested rights of action.
- Core Question of Law: Whether Notification No. 09/2023-Central Tax and Notification No.56/2023-Central Tax are legally valid given the Supreme Court's order on limitation under Article 142 of the Constitution and the provisions of Section 168A of the CGST Act.
Key Legal Issues & Findings:
Validity of Notification Nos. 09/2023 and 56/2023 vis-à-vis Supreme Court's Order on Limitation
Ruling:
- Outcome: The impugned Notifications in Notification No.09/2023 dated 31.03.2023 and Notification No. 56/2023 dated 28.12.2023 are vitiated and illegal, and the consequential order dated 28.08.2024 is set aside.
- Directions: The petitioners shall treat the impugned order dated 28.08.2024 as a show cause notice and submit their objections within a period of 8 weeks. Upon receipt of such objections, the authorities shall pass fresh orders after affording the petitioners an opportunity of hearing.
- Liberty: The authorities under the CGST Act retain the benefit of exclusion of the period 15.03.2020 to 28.02.2022 while reckoning limitation under sub-sections (2) and (10) of Section 73 of the CGST Act, in terms of the Supreme Court's order dated 10.01.2022 under Article 142 of the Constitution.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
This writ petition has been filed challenging the Notification No. 09/2023-Central Tax dated 31.03.2023 and the Notification No.56/2023-Central Tax dated the 28.12.2023 issued by the 3rd respondent.
2. Mr. R.Suresh Kumar, learned Additional Government Pleader, takes notice on behalf of the respondent.
3. By consent of the parties, the main writ petition is taken up for disposal at the admission stage itself.
4. When this Writ Petition is taken up for hearing, the respective learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondent, would submit that the issue involved in the present Writ Petition has already been decided vide the common order of this Court, dated 12.06.2025 passed in W.P.Nos.17184 of 2024, etc., batch, wherein, this Court has categorically held in paragraphs 9 to 12 as under:
“i) The authorities under the CGST Act shall have the benefit of exclusion of the period 15.03.2020 to 28.02.2022, while reckoning limitation under sub section (2) and (10) to Section 73 of CGST Act, in terms of the of the Supreme Court dated 10.01.2022 passed under Article 142 of the Constitution.
ii) Notification Nos.9 and 56 of 2023 stands vitiated and illegal for the following reasons:
a) It results in diminishing / curtailing the limitation which was otherwise available in view of the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court under Article 142 of Constitution, and thus contrary to the object of Section 168A of CGST Act.
b) It proceeds on an erroneous assumption of the limitation available and a misconception as to the scope and effect of the order of Hon’ble Supreme Court under Article 142 of Constitution. The impugned notification made on an erroneous assumption of the position in law is unsustainable on the ground of being arbitrary.
c) The impugned notification results in extinguishing vested right of action with the authorities under CGST Act by diminishing the limitation thus suffers from the vice of arbitrariness.
d) The impugned notification is issued on the basis of recommendation made without examining relevant materials discussed supra and thus stands vitiated.
e) In addition to the above reasons, impugned notification No.56/2023 is made even prior to the recommendations of the GST Council, failure to comply with the statutory mandate renders the notification illegal.
f) The impugned notification no. 56/2023 is issued on the basis of the recommendations of GIC which cannot be a substitute for GST Council and thus stands vitiated.
11. There are issues relating to violation of principles of natural justice, lack of jurisdiction, errors apparent on the face of record etc. These are questions which will have to be re examined by the assessing authority inasmuch as the thrust of the petitioner’s submissions before this Court as well as before the authorities has been primarily on the jurisdiction in view of the challenge to the validity of the notification.
12. In light of the present order, this Court is inclined to remand all the matters back to the assessing authority for passing orders afresh:
i. In case challenge is to the order of assessment/adjudication, petitioners shall treat the impugned orders as show cause notice and submit their objections within a period of 8 weeks from the date of uploading of the Web Copy of this order and the authorities shall proceed to pass orders afresh after affording the petitioners an opportunity of hearing.
ii. In case the challenge is to the notice it is open to the petitioner to submit their objections within a period of 8 weeks from the date of uploading of the Web Copy of this order and the authorities shall proceed to pass orders afresh after affording the petitioners an opportunity of hearing.
13. Accordingly, the writ petitions stand disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. ”
5. Therefore, considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and by following the aforesaid order dated 12.06.2025 passed by this Court in W.P.Nos.17184 of 2024, etc., batch, this Court holds that the impugned Notifications in Notification No. 09/2023 and Notification No.56/2023 stand vitiated and illegal. In such case, all the impugned orders are liable to be set aside.
6. Accordingly, this Court pass the following orders:
i) The impugned Notifications in Notification No.09/2023 dated 31.03.2023 and Notification No. 56/2023 dated 28.12.2023 stand vitiated and illegal.
ii) The consequential order dated 28.08.2024 is set aside. The petitioners shall treat the said impugned order as show cause notice and submit their objections within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
iii) Upon filing of such objections, the authorities shall proceed to pass orders afresh after affording the petitioners an opportunity of hearing.
7. With the above directions, the present Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed