HC Quashes Consolidated GST SCN for Multiple Years

Case Details: Shree Balaji Traders vs. GST Commissioner - [2026] 184 taxmann.com 701 (Bombay)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

• Anil L. Pansare & Nivedita P. Mehta, JJ.
• Shyam Dewani & Sahil Dewani, Advs. for the Petitioner.
• Ms P. D. Rane, Adv. for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

The petitioner challenged a consolidated show cause notice (SCN) issued by the jurisdictional officer under CGST, invoking fraud, covering multiple financial years and tax periods. The notice alleged suppression of taxable value, leading to short payment and applied mutatis mutandis to the Maharashtra GST Act and the IGST Act, while clubbing distinct tax periods and financial years into a single proceeding. The petitioner contended that such consolidation was impermissible under the GST framework, which operates on year wise assessment with separate annual returns, distinct limitation periods, and defined tax periods for each financial year. It was further contended that invoking fraud provisions only extends limitation and does not permit issuance of a consolidated notice across financial years. The matter was accordingly placed before the High Court.

High Court Held

The High Court held that the issuance of a consolidated SCN covering multiple financial years and tax periods was impermissible under Section 74 of the CGST Act. It held that the GST scheme mandates year wise determination of tax liability, with distinct annual returns, separate limitation for each financial year, and clearly defined tax periods, which cannot be merged through a single notice. The Court further held that allegations of fraud or suppression do not create any exception to this requirement, but only extend the limitation period to five years from the due date of furnishing the annual return for each respective year. Accordingly, the impugned notice was quashed, and the Department was permitted to proceed afresh by issuing distinct notices for each financial year.

List of Cases Reviewed

• Milroc Good Earth Developers v. Union of India [2025] 179 taxmann.com 465 (Bombay)/[2025] 112 GST 596 (Bombay)/[2026] 104 GSTL 45 (Bombay)
• Rite Water Solutions (India) Ltd. v. Joint Commissioner, CGST & Central Excise [2026] 183 taxmann.com 627 (Bombay) (para 19)followed

List of Cases Referred to

• Milroc Good Earth Developers v. Union of India [2025] 179 taxmann.com 465 (Bombay)/[2025] 112 GST 596 (Bombay)/[2026] 104 GSTL 45 (Bombay) (para 5)
• Rite Water Solutions (India) Ltd. v. Joint Commissioner, CGST & Central Excise [2026] 183 taxmann.com 627 (Bombay) (para 7)
• Mathur Polymers v. Union of India [2025] 177 taxmann.com 860 (Delhi)/[2025] 103 GSTL 72 (Delhi) (para 11)
• Mathur Polymers v. Union of India [2026] 182 taxmann.com 215 (SC) (para 12)
• CIT, Vidarbha and Marathwada v. Smt. Godavari Devi Saraf Tumsar 1978 (2) ELTJ 624 (Bom) (para 15).