[Cites 4, Cited by 0]
Orissa High Court
M/S. Simplex Infrastructures vs Chief Commissioner Of Cgst & .... ... on 8 January, 2026
Author: Murahari Sri Raman
Bench: Murahari Sri Raman
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No. 34748 of 2025
M/S. Simplex Infrastructures .... Petitioner
Limited, Tangi, Cuttack
Mr. A.N. Mohanty, Advocate
-versus-
Chief Commissioner of CGST & .... Opposite Parties
Central Excise, Bhubaneswar and
another
Mr. B.A. Prusty, Senior Standing Counsel
CORAM:
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN
ORDER
Order No. 08.01.2026
03. W.P.(C) No.34748 of 2025 and I.A. No.21528 of 2025
1. Challenging the Order-in-Original No. AC/CTC-II/GST-47/2025
dated 4th September, 2025, corresponding to Demand-cum-Show
Cause notice No. GST/CTC-II Divn/45/2024 dated 13th December,
2024 along with all consequential proceedings, on the ground that
the clubbing of multiple assessment years/financial years for the
purpose of issuing a single show-cause notice is impermissible in
law and constitutes a violation of the provisions of the Central
Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, the Odisha Goods and Services
Tax Act, 2017, as well as the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules,
2017, and the Odisha Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, the
petitioners have approached this Court by filing this writ petition
craving to invoke extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226/227 of
the Constitution of India.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners relies on view taken by a
learned single Judge in the High Court of Karnataka in Writ Petition
No.15810 of 2024 (T-Res) on judgment dated 4th September, 2024
(Veremax Technology Services Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner
of Central Tax). The learned Judge held, consolidation of multiple
assessment years into single show cause notice contravenes the
provisions, he seeks interference, interim at the stage.
3. Mr. B.A. Prusty, learned Senior Standing Counsel appears on
behalf of revenue and draws attention to definitions Section 2(106)
to submit, meaning given to 'tax period', when applied to the show
cause notice brooks no interference. He submits further as on date of
issuance of the show cause notice, petitioners had obtained
registration.
4. Petitioner is relying on view taken by a learned single Judge
against consolidation of tax period. In the circumstances, the writ
petition requires hearing.
5. Let this matter be tagged with W.P.(C) No.10000 of 2025
and W.P.(C) No.8858 of 2025 and be listed on the same day when
the said writ petition is directed to be listed. Counter affidavit, if any,
be filed in the meantime.
6. As an interim measure, it is directed that no further
proceedings be taken on the basis of impugned Order-in-Original
issued by Opposite Party No.2 till the next date.
(Harish Tandon)
Chief Justice
(M.S. Raman)
Sisira
Signed by: SISIRA KUMAR BEHERA
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
Date: 09-Jan-2026 17:19:02
