Composite Show Cause Notice Covering Multiple Assessment Years Is Invalid Under Section 73 GST

By | September 28, 2026
0 Comment
Composite Show Cause Notice Covering Multiple Assessment Years Is Invalid Under Section 73 GST

Issue

  • Whether issuing a single composite Show Cause Notice (SCN) under Section 73 covering multiple assessment years and tax periods is legally permissible.

Facts

  • Issuance of Composite SCN: The respondents issued a single composite Show Cause Notice (Ext.P1) covering multiple assessment years and tax periods spanning from April 2021 to July 2024.
  • Combining Adjudications: The impugned SCN bundled distinct tax periods and separate adjudication proceedings into a single notice.
  • Writ Petition Filed: The petitioner invoked the writ jurisdiction of the High Court, contending that a composite SCN for multiple financial years lacks statutory sanction and violates established legal principles.

Decision

  • Precedents Applied: Following established Division Bench precedents, composite show cause notices covering multiple assessment years/periods are impermissible in law [In favor of assessee].
  • Quashing of SCN: The composite Show Cause Notice (Ext.P1) was quashed due to procedural and statutory invalidity [In favor of assessee].
  • Liberty for Separate Notices: The Department was granted liberty to issue fresh, separate show cause notices for each relevant assessment year independently [In favor of assessee].
  • Exclusion of Limitation Period: The period between the issuance of Ext.P1 and the receipt of a certified copy of the judgment shall be excluded while computing limitation for initiating fresh proceedings [In favor of assessee].

Key Takeaways

  • No Composite SCNs: Revenue authorities cannot combine multiple assessment years into a single Show Cause Notice under Section 73.
  • Year-Wise Proceedings: A separate notice must be issued for each distinct assessment year to enable independent adjudication.
  • Limitation Benefit: Quashing a composite notice allows the Department to issue fresh year-wise notices, with the intervening litigation period excluded for limitation calculations.
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
Advanced Hair Restoration in India (P.) Ltd.
v.
Additional Director, Directorate General of Goods and Services Tax Intelligence
ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A., J.
WP(C) NO. 31315 OF 2026
SEPTEMBER  15, 2026
Smt. G. Mini, P.J.Anilkumar, Satyajith K. Warrier, P.S. Sree Prasad, Advs. and A. Kumar, Sr. Adv. for the Petitioner. Sreelal N. Warrier and V. Girishkumkar, SCs 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 the period from April 2021 to July 2024. 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] andTharayil 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.