GST INDIA Biz — Imposition of interest and penalty in assessment order without proposal in show cause notice under Section 75(7) of the GST Act.

Chaurasiya Zarda Bhandar vs State of U.P. & Others

Date of Order: November 19, 2025

Case Law No: GIB-AHC-LKO-2025-04

Subject: Imposition of interest and penalty in assessment order without proposal in show cause notice under Section 75(7) of the GST Act.

Description:

The writ petition was allowed. The assessment and demand order dated 29.08.2024, as well as the consequential attachment order dated 11.09.2025, were quashed and set aside.

The Court held that the show cause notice for the financial year 2019–20 proposed recovery of tax amounting to Rs. 29,07,002/- and did not contain any proposal for imposition of interest or penalty.

However, the impugned order imposed interest and penalty under CGST and SGST totaling Rs. 55,71,191/-. The Court found that such imposition was contrary to Section 75(7), which provides that the amount of tax, interest and penalty demanded in the order shall not be in excess of the amount specified in the notice and no demand shall be confirmed on grounds other than those specified in the notice.

Since the show cause notice contained no reference to interest or penalty, the impugned order was held to be unsustainable and arbitrary.

The matter was remitted to the adjudicating authority to pass fresh orders in accordance with law.

Other Case Law

SIDDHI VINAYAK AUTOMOBILES v. COMMISSIONER OF KERALA STATE GST, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

Validity of penalty under Section 129(3) of the CGST/KGST Acts, 2017 for transportation without an e-way bill at the time of interception. Whether an order passed beyond the mandatory seven-day period prescribed under Section 129(3) is legally sustainable

BACKGROUNDAutomobile spare parts were transported under e-invoices, but the vehi...

Mukesh Kumar Garg vs. Union of India & Others

Whether a writ petition is maintainable against a penalty order under Section 74 read with Section 122(1) of the CGST Act, when the petitioner — alleged mastermind of a fake ITC network of 28 firms — claims he is not a taxable person and that penalty,

BACKGROUNDThe Department conducted a detailed investigation and found that the p...

S.A. Aromatics Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. vs. Union of India & Ors.

Validity of composite show cause notice for multiple financial years and multiple noticees – Sections 73, 74 and 6(2)(b) of the CGST Act, 2017 and UPGST Act, 2017.

Facts:Search and investigation proceedings were conducted by different GST autho...