Composite GST SCNs for Multiple Years Invalid | HC

  • Blog|News|GST & Customs|
  • 3 Min Read
  • By Taxmann
  • |
  • Last Updated on 12 March, 2026

Latest from Taxmann

composite GST SCN

Case Details: Accountants Service Society vs. Union of India - [2026] 184 taxmann.com 112 (Kerala)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

  • Ziyad Rahman A.A., J.
  • Smt. Sneha Mariya James, Smt.Vydehi P., Sukumar Nainan Oommen & Sherry Samuel Oommen, Advs. for the Petitioner.
  • P. R. Sreejith, Adv. & K. Arjun Venugopal, CGC for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

Proceedings were initiated against the petitioners, who were registered persons under the CGST Act and the Kerala GST Act, through show cause notices issued under sections 73 and 74 covering multiple financial or assessment years by way of a single composite notice. In certain instances, the proper officer also passed consolidated adjudication orders on the basis of such notices. The petitioners challenged the competence of the proper officer to issue composite notices and pass orders covering multiple years, contending that the statutory scheme required separate proceedings for each year. It was further submitted that consolidation caused prejudice in relation to limitation and pre-deposit requirements since the period for initiation and completion of proceedings operated independently for each year. The matter was accordingly placed before the Kerala High Court.

High Court Held

The Kerala High Court held that the statutory framework of sections 73 and 74 of the CGST Act did not permit the issuance of composite show cause notices or adjudication orders covering multiple years. The Court observed that the limitation for initiation and completion of proceedings was determined with reference to the due date of the annual return for each year, and therefore, proceedings had to be undertaken year-wise. It was held that the consolidation of proceedings could cause serious prejudice as it curtailed the adjudication period available for later years and increased the burden of pre-deposit by leading to a consolidated order. The Court further clarified that non-speaking dismissal of special leave petitions against a contrary view did not constitute binding precedent. Accordingly, the impugned composite notices and adjudication orders were quashed, with liberty granted to the department to initiate fresh proceedings by issuing separate notices for each year, excluding the period during which the writ petitions remained pending for computing limitation.

List of Cases Reviewed

  • M/s.Lakshmi Mobile Accessories v. Joint Commissioner (Intelligence & Enforcement) [2025 KHC Online 149]
  • Tharayil Medicals v. The Deputy Commissioner [2025 KHC Online 4671. (para 8) followed

List of Cases Referred to

Disclaimer: The content/information published on the website is only for general information of the user and shall not be construed as legal advice. While the Taxmann has exercised reasonable efforts to ensure the veracity of information/content published, Taxmann shall be under no liability in any manner whatsoever for incorrect information, if any.

Taxmann Publications has a dedicated in-house Research & Editorial Team. This team consists of a team of Chartered Accountants, Company Secretaries, and Lawyers. This team works under the guidance and supervision of editor-in-chief Mr Rakesh Bhargava.

The Research and Editorial Team is responsible for developing reliable and accurate content for the readers. The team follows the six-sigma approach to achieve the benchmark of zero error in its publications and research platforms. The team ensures that the following publication guidelines are thoroughly followed while developing the content:

  • The statutory material is obtained only from the authorized and reliable sources
  • All the latest developments in the judicial and legislative fields are covered
  • Prepare the analytical write-ups on current, controversial, and important issues to help the readers to understand the concept and its implications
  • Every content published by Taxmann is complete, accurate and lucid
  • All evidence-based statements are supported with proper reference to Section, Circular No., Notification No. or citations
  • The golden rules of grammar, style and consistency are thoroughly followed
  • Font and size that’s easy to read and remain consistent across all imprint and digital publications are applied

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

«
»

Everything on Tax and Corporate Laws of India

To subscribe to our weekly newsletter please log in/register on Taxmann.com

Author: Taxmann

Taxmann Publications has a dedicated in-house Research & Editorial Team. This team consists of a team of Chartered Accountants, Company Secretaries, and Lawyers. This team works under the guidance and supervision of editor-in-chief Mr Rakesh Bhargava.

The Research and Editorial Team is responsible for developing reliable and accurate content for the readers. The team follows the six-sigma approach to achieve the benchmark of zero error in its publications and research platforms. The team ensures that the following publication guidelines are thoroughly followed while developing the content:

  • The statutory material is obtained only from the authorized and reliable sources
  • All the latest developments in the judicial and legislative fields are covered
  • Prepare the analytical write-ups on current, controversial, and important issues to help the readers to understand the concept and its implications
  • Every content published by Taxmann is complete, accurate and lucid
  • All evidence-based statements are supported with proper reference to Section, Circular No., Notification No. or citations
  • The golden rules of grammar, style and consistency are thoroughly followed
  • Font and size that's easy to read and remain consistent across all imprint and digital publications are applied