HC Grants Interim Protection to Assessee as Notification Extending Time Limit for Passing Order Lacks GST Council’s Approval

Case Details: Pallab Kumar Pandit v. Union of India - [2024] 166 taxmann.com 146 (Gauhati)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

• Devashis Baruah, J.
• R.S. Mishra for the Petitioner.
• B. Gogoi, Standing Counsel, Finance & Taxation Department for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

The petitioner was aggrieved by the action on the part of the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs in issuance of Notification No. 56/2023 dated 28.12.2023 extending time limit for passing order under section 73(9) for financial years 2018-19 & 2019-20. It filed writ petition and challenged the notification on ground that there was no recommendation of GST Council, which was mandatory requirement for issuance of said notification.

High Court Held

The Honorable High Court noted that there was no recommendation insofar issuance of said notification was concerned. Therefore, it was held that prima facie it appeared that the notification was not in consonance with provisions of Section 168A. However, the Central government was further taking steps for purpose of getting GST council ratification, which was yet to take place.

Therefore, the Court was of the view that the notification could not stand scrutiny of law and all consequential actions so taken on basis of such notification would also fail. Thus, the Court held that no coercive action would be taken on basis of impugned assessment order and department was directed to file affidavit.