Composite Show Cause Notice Covering Multiple Financial Years Under GST Is Impermissible and Legally Invalid
Issue
Whether the issuance of a single composite Show Cause Notice (SCN) under Section 73 covering multiple financial years (FY 2020-21 to FY 2024-25) is legally valid, or if separate year-wise notices are mandatory under the GST law.
Facts
-
The respondents issued a single composite show cause notice (Ext.P1) under Section 73 of the CGST/KGST Act to the petitioner.
-
The composite notice covered demand proceedings spanning across multiple financial years, specifically FY 2020-21 through FY 2024-25.
-
The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging the validity of Ext.P1 on the ground that composite SCNs covering multiple tax periods are impermissible under GST law.
-
The petitioner contended that issuing separate, year-wise show cause notices is mandatory for adjudication under Section 73.
Decision
-
The High Court noted that a Division Bench precedent had already firmly disapproved and invalidated composite show cause notices spanning across multiple financial years.
-
Applying these established legal principles, the Court held that judicial interference was warranted against the impugned notice.
-
The composite SCN (Ext.P1) was quashed in favor of the assessee.
-
The Court granted liberty to the respondents to issue separate, year-wise notices for each relevant financial year.
-
The period from the date of issuance of Ext.P1 until the receipt of a certified copy of the judgment was ordered to be excluded when computing limitation for initiating fresh proceedings.
Key Takeaways
-
Mandatory Year-Wise SCNs: Under Section 73 of the CGST/SGST Act, tax authorities cannot issue a single consolidated or composite show cause notice covering multiple financial years; separate notices must be issued for each tax period/year.
-
Jurisdictional Defect: A composite SCN spanning multiple years suffers from a fundamental legal defect, rendering the notice and any consequential proceedings invalid.
-
Exclusion of Limitation Period: When a composite SCN is quashed with liberty to issue fresh individual notices, the time elapsed during the litigation is excluded for computing statutory limitation under Section 73.
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
St.Josephs Hospital Trust
v.
Joint Commissioner
ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A., J.
WP(C) NO. 30522 OF 2026
SEPTEMBER 8, 2026
Noel Jacob, M.S. Amal Dharsan, Dr. Thushara James and Anuraj V. G., Advs. for the Petitioner. V. Girishkumar, SC for the Respondent.
JUDGMENT
1. This writ petition is submitted by the petitioner challenging Ext.P1 composite Show Cause Notice which was issued by the respondents for multiple financial years namely, 2020-2021 to 2024-2025. The main challenge raised against the sustainability of the same is that, issuance of a composite notice for multiple assessment years was found to be not legally sustainable as per the decision rendered by this Court in Joint Commissioner (Intelligence & Enforcement) v. Lakshmi Mobile Accessories 108 GST 750/95 GSTL 356 (Kerala)/[2025 KHC OnLine 149] and Tharayil Medicals v. Deputy Commissioner, SGST Department, Thrissur (Kerala)/[2025 KHC OnLine 467].
2. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents, I find merits in the said submission, in view of the fact that, such a finding was indeed entered into by the Division Bench of this Court in the decisions referred to above.
3. In such circumstances, in the light of the principles laid down by this Court in the above referred judgments, an interference is required. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of, quashing Ext.P1, granting liberty to the respondent to issue separate notices for the relevant assessment years. However, the period from the date of Ext.P1 till the date of receipt of certified copy of the judgment shall be excluded while computing the period of limitation for initiating fresh proceeding. All the other contentions of the parties are left open.