Composite show-cause notices covering multiple financial years under CGST/KGST Act are illegal as assessments must pertain to individual years, respecting statutory limitations and ensuring natural justice.

ORDER :

S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR, J.

In this petition, the petitioner seeks for the following reliefs:

“a) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, quashing the impugned Show-Cause Notice bearing No.GEXCOM/MYS-HPU/GST/ADC/13-2025-26 and DIN:20250957YY00006606D0 dated 30.09.2025 (Annexure-A) issued by the Respondent No.4 – Additional Commissioner of Central Tax, Mysuru Commissionerate, as being wholly without jurisdiction, arbitrary, violative of principles of natural justice, and contrary to the provisions of the CGST/KGST Acts, 2017;

b) Issue a writ of prohibition or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, restraining the Respondents, their officers and subordinates from proceedings further or taking any coercive or adjudicatory steps pursuant to the impugned Show cause notice dated 30.09.2025;

c) Declare that the transfer of development rights under the Joint Development Agreements executed for the projects “Pramur Aster” and “Pramur Meadows”; and the sale of developed plots and completed apartments post-completion certificate – do not constitute “supply” within the meaning of Section 7 read with Schedule III of the CGST Act, 2017, and are therefore not exigible to GST;

d) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate direction restraining the Respondents, their officers, and subordinates from taking any coercive steps or adjudicatory action pursuant to the impugned Show cause notice dated 30.09.2025, pending disposal of this Writ Petition (Annexure-A) issued by the Respondent No.4 – Additional Commissioner of Central Tax, Mysuru Commissionerate,;

e) Issue any other direction or grant any other relief, as deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of this case, in the interest of justice.

f) Issue a direction to provide for the cost of this petition.”

2. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the petitioner is a registered partnership firm engaged in the business of real estate development including development of layouts and construction of residential apartments and is duly registered under the Central Goods and Services Act, 2017 (CGST Act) w.e.f. 04.02.2020. Being aggrieved by the impugned Show cause notice dated 30.09.2025 issued by the respondents under Section 74 (1) of the CGST/KGST Act, proposing demand in a sum of Rs.11,86,86,292/- towards tax, interest and penalty, petitioner is before this Court by way of the present petition.

3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents-revenue and perused the material on record.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would reiterate the various contentions urged in the petition and refer to the material on record and submit that since the impugned show cause notice is a composite notice encompassing multiple/several financial years/assessment periods from 2019-20 to 2023-24 and the demands contained therein pertain/relate to as well as seek and purport to bunch/consolidate/club multiple tax periods/financial years, i.e., more than one tax period/financial year, the impugned show cause notice issued under Section 73 /74 of the CGST/KGST Act, 2017 is illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction or authority of law and contrary to the provisions of the CGST/KGST Act and the impugned show cause notice and proceedings, orders, notices etc., pursuant thereto deserve to be quashed. In support of his submissions, learned counsel placed reliance upon the following judgments:

(i) Veremax Technologies Services Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax, Bengaluru – (2024) 167 taxmann.com 332 (Karnataka).

(ii) Bangalor