G.R. Infra Projects Limited, Ratlam v. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.
BACKGROUND
The dispute concerned a show-cause notice dated 13.06.2025 for AY 2018-19. The assessee contended that the notice was beyond Section 73 limitation. The State sought to justify the proceedings under Section 74 by relying on allegations of fraud and suppression elaborated in its counter affidavit.
COURT OBSERVATIONS
The Supreme Court held that the Section 73 limitation expired on 28.02.2025 after applying the statutory extensions and the COVID-19 exclusion. The SCN dated 13.06.2025 was therefore beyond Section 73 limitation. The Court further held that Section 74 cannot be invoked merely by mechanically using the words fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression; the factual basis must emanate from the SCN itself.
FINAL VERDICT
The Supreme Court allowed the Civil Appeal, set aside the High Court's order and quashed the impugned Section 74 show-cause notice.
Cases Referred by Court:
• Re: Cognizance for Extension of Limitation, Suo Motu Writ Petition (C) No. 3 of 2020 — Supreme Court of India — relied upon for exclusion of the COVID-19 period while computing statutory limitation, including the period from 15.03.2020 to 28.02.2022.
Other Case Law
Singhvi Trandelink LLP & Anr. v. State of Gujarat & Anr.
Whether an order is sustainable where the documents relied upon during investigation were supplied to the assessee only subsequently and not along with the show cause notice, and where the opportunity to cross-examine witnesses whose statements were relie
BackgroundThe petitioners challenged an order passed by the SGST authority. Purs...
Read MoreManoja Kumar Nayak vs Commissioner,
Validity of initiation of proceedings under Section 74 of the CGST Act, 2017 and levy of tax, interest under Section 50, and penalty — where ITC availed from an alleged non-existent supplier had already been voluntarily reversed by the taxpayer prior to
BACKGROUNDThe petitioner, Manoja Kumar Nayak , engaged in transportation and wor...
Read MoreD.P. Jain & Co. Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India & Ors.
GST liability on Corporate Guarantee provided by a parent/holding company to banks on behalf of its subsidiary companies without any consideration — validity of CBIC Circular No. 204/16/2023 and Rule 28(2) of CGST Rules, 2017.
BACKGROUNDThe Petitioner, D.P. Jain & Co. Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., is engag...
Read More