The Delhi High Court has held that consolidation of SCN for multiple years is allowed in GST ITC fraud cases.
The bench of Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Shail Jain has disposed of a writ petition filed by M/s Tushar Products against the Additional Commissioner of CGST, Delhi North, while granting the company liberty to challenge the tax authority’s order through a statutory appeal.
The case revolved around allegations that the company had fraudulently availed Input Tax Credit (ITC) worth over Rs. 83 crore through transactions spanning multiple financial years between 2017 and 2021.
Tushar Products had approached the High Court challenging the Order which demanded Rs. 20,02,708 (₹10,01,354 each towards tax and penalty). A Show Cause Notice dated July 23, 2024, issued by the Deputy Commissioner, Anti-Evasion, CGST Delhi North.
The company contented that a single consolidated Show Cause Notice (SCN) for multiple financial years was impermissible under the CGST Act.
The court rejected this argument, citing its earlier ruling in Ambika Traders, where it had clarified that Section 73 and 74 of the CGST Act allow notices to be issued “for any period” or “for such periods”, making it legally valid to issue a consolidated notice covering multiple years.
The court highlighted that fraudulent ITC often involves interlinked transactions across financial years. A consolidated notice is not only permissible but sometimes necessary to establish a chain of fraudulent activity. Parliamentary records have revealed large-scale misuse of ITC, with over 29,000 bogus firms detected since May 2023, involving fake credits worth Rs. 44,015 crore.
The bench observed that Tushar Products appeared to be one of the “main entities/persons involved” in such fraudulent activity, based on allegations raised by tax authorities.
The petition was disposed of since the order under challenge was an appealable order under Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017. The court granted liberty to Tushar Products to file an appeal by September 30, 2025, along with requisite pre-deposits. It also directed that if the appeal is filed within the deadline, the Appellate Authority must not dismiss it on limitation grounds and decide it on merits.
Case Details
Case Title: M/S Tushar Products Versus Additional Commissioner, CGST, Delhi North
Case No.: W.P.(C) 5522/2025 & CM APPL. 25139/2025
Date: 20th August, 2025
Counsel For Petitioner: Kunal Jha, Adv.
Counsel For Respondent: Mudit Gupta & Sanyam Gupta
