Ask Jurishour AI

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
tdb_templates
saswp_reviews
saswp-collections
saswp_rvs_location
tdc-review-email
web-story-font
web-story
googlesitekit_email
tds_locker
tds_email
saswp
mailpoet_page
mailpoet_email
tdcpt_tunes
tdc-review
pronamic_payment
pronamic_gateway
pronamic_pay_subscr
wpcode
HomeGSTGST Notice Issued After Regular Assessment Deadline Stayed as Court Questions Basis...

GST Notice Issued After Regular Assessment Deadline Stayed as Court Questions Basis for Invoking S. 74: Madras HC

Published on

🚀 Stay Connected With JurisHour

WhatsApp X Telegram

The Madras High Court has granted an interim stay in appeal against a GST show cause notice for the 2017–18 assessment year. 

The bench of Justice Dr Anita Sumanth and Justice S. Raveekumar observed that the notice, issued after the deadline for regular assessment, did not prima facie contain a finding that would justify invoking the extended period under Section 74 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.

Buy Now: E-Magazine: 1000+ Landmark GST Judgments (2017–2026)

The court recorded that tax officers inspected Canon India on September 26, 2023, in relation to the 2017–18 assessment year. It noted that, in light of the Supreme Court decision cited in its order, the time for completing a regular assessment under Section 73 expired on December 31, 2023.

The authorities subsequently issued a show cause notice on July 13, 2024, under Section 74, relying on the extended limitation period. Canon India challenged that notice before the writ court and has now approached the Division Bench in appeal.

Section 73 addresses cases involving unpaid or short-paid tax, erroneous refunds, or wrongly availed or utilised input tax credit that do not involve fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression of facts to evade tax. Section 74 concerns cases involving those allegations. 

The Division Bench said that invoking Section 74 requires a finding in the show cause notice that the alleged short payment of tax or availment of input tax credit was due to fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression of facts. On its initial examination, the court did not find such a finding in the notice challenged by Canon India.

That observation is significant because the July 2024 notice was issued after the December 2023 deadline identified by the court for regular assessment. The question before the Bench is whether the authorities had stated the grounds necessary to proceed under the extended-period provision.

Membership Required to Access Case Details & Order Copy

To view the complete Case Details and Download Order Copy, you must have an active membership. Please subscribe to continue.

Membership Required

You must be a member to access this content.

View Membership Levels

Already a member? Log in here

Read More: Supplier’s Retrospective GST Registration Cancellation Alone Can’t Undo Rs. 76,750 ITC Relief: GSTAT

Nikhil Bhandari
Nikhil Bhandari
Nikhil Bhandari is a Chartered Accountant and a Indirect Tax professional with over 5 years of post-qualification experience in tax advisory, compliance management, and tax process optimization. Associated with SDU LLP since August 2015 spanning his articleship through to his current role as Manager Nikhil has uniquely navigated India’s transition from the legacy tax regime into the GST era.His expertise encompasses both strategic advisory and Indirect Tax litigation, where he represents clients in complex disputes across the manufacturing, service, and e-commerce sectors. By providing high-level counsel to corporate leadership, he ensures that tax positions are not only robust and compliant but also structured for long-term operational efficiency.Beyond his core practice, Nikhil is a proactive contributor to the GST ecosystem. He is dedicated to tracking and analyzing judicial precedents from various High Courts and the Supreme Court, fostering greater clarity and ease of access to tax intelligence for the wider professional community.

Latest articles

Supplier’s Retrospective GST Registration Cancellation Alone Can’t Undo Rs. 76,750 ITC Relief: GSTAT

The Goods and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT) Lucknow Bench has dismissed a departmental...

Govt. to Evaluate RoSCTL and RoDTEP Export Schemes Amid Changing Global Trade Conditions

NITI Aayog’s proposed study will examine whether the two tax remission schemes are helping...

Rs. 3.13 Lakh GST Demand Over Duplicate E-Way Bills Quashed For Denial of Personal Hearing: GSTAT

The bench of  Raipur Bench of GST Appellate Tribunal has held that two e-way...

More like this

Supplier’s Retrospective GST Registration Cancellation Alone Can’t Undo Rs. 76,750 ITC Relief: GSTAT

The Goods and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT) Lucknow Bench has dismissed a departmental...

Govt. to Evaluate RoSCTL and RoDTEP Export Schemes Amid Changing Global Trade Conditions

NITI Aayog’s proposed study will examine whether the two tax remission schemes are helping...

Rs. 3.13 Lakh GST Demand Over Duplicate E-Way Bills Quashed For Denial of Personal Hearing: GSTAT

The bench of  Raipur Bench of GST Appellate Tribunal has held that two e-way...