Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 4473 Tel
Judgement Date : 3 April, 2025
THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL
AND
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE RENUKA YARA
WRIT PETITION No.9924 of 2025
ORDER (Per the Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice Sujoy Paul):
Sri Y. Siri Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner;
Sri Swaroop Oorilla, learned Special Government Pleader for
State Tax, for respondent Nos.1 to 3 and Sri B. Mukherjee,
learned counsel representing Sri Gadi Praveen Kumar, learned
Deputy Solicitor General of India, for respondent No.4.
2. With the consent, finally heard.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
impugned show cause notice was issued beyond the permissible
statutory limitation. The tax period is 2020-2021. The
impugned show cause notice was issued on 30.11.2024 and the
impugned assessment order was passed on 28.02.2025. A
conjoint reading of Section 73(2) and (10) of the Central Goods
and Services Tax Act, 2017 (for short, 'the Act'), made it
permissible for the respondents to issue the show cause notice
upto 28.11.2024 whereas, in the present case, it was issued on
30.11.2024 and therefore, it is beyond the statutory period of
limitation. Reliance is placed on the judgment of Andhra
Pradesh High Court in M/s. The Cotton Corporation of India
v. Assistant Commissioner (ST) (Audit) (FAC), State of
Andhra Pradesh, Union of India 1.
4. Learned Special Government Pleader for State Tax
formally opposed the petition. However, he did not dispute the
facts regarding tax period, issuance of impugned show cause
notice and date of passing of impugned assessment order.
5. We find substance in the argument of learned counsel
for the petitioner that a combined reading of Section 73(2) and
(10) of the Act permits the Department to issue show cause
notice upto three months prior to the passing of the assessment
order. The assessment order was passed on 28.02.2025 and
therefore, the show cause notice could have been issued upto
28.11.2024. Whereas, in the instant case, it was issued on
30.11.2024. Similar view was taken by the Andhra Pradesh
High Court in M/s. The Cotton Corporation of India (supra).
In view of the statutory provisions and interpretation by the
Andhra Pradesh High Court, we find substantial force in the
argument of learned counsel for the petitioner that the impugned
assessment order cannot sustain judicial scrutiny.
2025 (2) TMI 362-Andhra Pradesh High Court
6. Resultantly the impugned assessment order dated
28.02.2025 is set aside and the Writ Petition is allowed to the
extent indicated above. No costs.
Interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall also
stand closed.
___________________ SUJOY PAUL, ACJ
____________________ RENUKA YARA, J
Date: 03.04.2025 Myk/Tsr
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!