??Desk of CA. Praveen Sharma 669 Series (CAPS) ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF The Cotton Corporation of India

? ?????????????? ???? ?????????? ?????????? ???? ???????? ???????????????? ?????????????????????? ?????? ???????? ?????????? ????????????

?The petitioner challenged a Show Cause Notice (SCN) dated 30.11.2024, issued under Section 73(1) r/w Rule 142 of the APGST Rules, related to the assessment year 2020-21, citing it was issued beyond the statutory time limit.

??????? ??????????????????:

?????????????????????’?? ??????????:

?As per Section 73(10) of the APGST Act, the assessment order must be issued within 3 years from the due date of the Annual Return for FY 2020-21 (i.e., 28.02.2022).

?Under Section 73(2), the SCN should have been issued at least 3 months before the order date, i.e., by 28.11.2024.

?The SCN issued on 30.11.2024 was thus time-barred.

?????????????????????’?? ??????????????:

?Argued that "month" refers to a calendar month, making the SCN within the permissible period.

?Claimed Section 73(2) is directory, not mandatory, and the delay should be condoned.

???????????’?? ????????????????????????:

?Citing judgments from the Supreme Court and House of Lords, the court ruled that "month" refers to the corresponding date in subsequent months.

?Hence, the cut-off date was 28.11.2024, and the SCN issued on 30.11.2024 was beyond the permissible limit.

?The court held that Section 73(2) is mandatory, emphasizing the importance of timely notices to protect taxpayers' rights.

???????????’?? ??????????????:

?The writ petition was allowed, and the SCN dated 30.11.2024 was quashed.

?The court ruled that delays cannot be condoned, and the time limits are mandatory.

?No order as to costs, and all pending petitions were closed.

?This judgment reinforces the strict adherence to GST timelines for issuing notices and orders.

Ask with https://taxbotgpt.ai/ for more information.

CA. Praveen Sharma