Allahabad High Court: Notification Extending Time Limit Not Applicable for FY 2017-18 Under Section 73
Date: December 19, 2024
Category: Important Pronouncements
Read Time: 4 Minutes
The Allahabad High Court, in the case of M/s. AV Pharma v. State of UP [Writ Tax No. 264 of 2024], ruled that a notification extending the time limit under Section 73 of the CGST Act, 2017, could not apply retrospectively to FY 2017-18. Consequently, the court quashed the orders issued by the GST Department for that financial year.
Case Summary
Petitioner: M/s. AV Pharma
Orders Issued On: October 5, 2024 (Form GST DRC-13) and December 2, 2023 (Form GST DRC-07)
Financial Year in Question: 2017-18
Legal Challenge: The petitioner argued that the orders were issued beyond the prescribed time limit under Section 73(10) of the CGST Act, 2017.
Key Issue
The primary question was whether a notification extending the time limit under Section 73 could apply to FY 2017-18, even though the prescribed time had already expired before the notification came into effect.
Court’s Observations and Ruling
1. Notification Details
The time limit for passing orders under Section 73 for FY 2017-18 was extended via:
- State Notification No. 515 (April 24, 2023)
- Central Notification No. 09/2023 (March 31, 2023)
Both notifications had retrospective effect from March 31, 2023, extending the deadline to December 31, 2023.
2. Expired Time Limit
The original time limit for issuing orders under Section 73(10) had already expired on February 5, 2023. The court clarified that notifications issued after the expiry of the time limit cannot retroactively revive the right to pass such orders.
3. Court’s Opinion
The court determined that the Impugned Orders were issued beyond the permissible time limit under Section 73(10) as applicable during the relevant period. Notifications extending time limits cannot apply retrospectively when the deadline has already expired.
4. Judgment
The court quashed the Impugned Orders issued in Form GST DRC-13 and DRC-07. It allowed the writ petition and granted relief to the petitioner.
Legal Implications
This ruling underscores that notifications extending time limits under the CGST Act cannot apply retrospectively if the original time limit has already expired.
Impact on Taxpayers
Taxpayers can rely on this judgment in similar cases where notices or orders are issued after the statutory deadline.
Compliance Emphasis
The case highlights the need for tax authorities to adhere to prescribed timelines under GST law. Failure to do so could lead to procedural challenges and litigation.
This judgment reaffirms the importance of timely actions under GST law. Businesses and tax professionals should monitor such developments to safeguard their rights and minimize litigation risks.
