Proper officers must issue separate show cause notices for different assessment years under CGST/SGST Act, respecting distinct timelines and potential defenses.

JUDGMENT :

Easwaran S., J.

Does the scheme of CGST/SGST Act empowers the proper officer to issue a composite notice for different assessment years is the question raised before us in this intra court appeal.

2. The brief facts necessary for the disposal of the writ appeal are as follows:

The appellant/writ petitioner was served with a show cause notice under Section 74 of the CGST/SGST Act dated 5.8.2024 proposing to initiate proceedings under Section 74 (10) of the CGST/SGST Act for the assessment years 2017-2018, 2018-2019, 2019-2020, 2020-2021 and 2021-2022. In the aforesaid notice, the proper officer concluded that, for different assessment years, the appellant/writ petitioner had applied incorrect HSNs, and therefore, the rate of tax applied is incorrect and thus proposed a reassessment finding that there is a wrong application of tax rate at Rs.21,13,080/- (CGST - Rs.10,56,540/ - SGST- Rs.10,56,540/-). The appellant immediately approached this Court by the writ petition questioning Ext.P1 show cause notice on the ground that, going by the decision of the Karnataka High Court in Writ Petition No.16500 of 2024 ( M/s Bangalore Golf Club v. Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes ), a composite show cause notice is not permissible under law. The learned Single Judge disposed of the writ petition, relegating the petitioner to file a suitable reply to the show cause notice by taking up any issue specific to any year and also directed the authority to independently consider the said issue while passing the final order of adjudication. Aggrieved by the said judgment, the present intra-court appeal is preferred by the appellant/writ petitioner.

3. Heard Smt. Krishna K., the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Sri. V.K. Shamsudheen, the learned Senior Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents.

4. Smt. Krishna K., the learned counsel appearing for the appellant, primarily contended that the composite show cause notice issued by the proper officer will certainly act in detriment to the interest of the assessee, especially since, the proper officer will proceed to assess the petitioner in accordance with the proposal contained in the show cause notice for different assessment years, for which, the time prescribed for the completion of the proceedings under Section 74 of the Act is yet to expire. In support of her contentions, the learned counsel relied on the decision of this Court in Joint Commissioner (Intelligence & Enforcement) v. Lakshmi Mobile Accessories [ (2025) 171 taxmann.com 214 (Kerala) ], wherein it was held by the Division Bench, wherein one of us was a party [DR. A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar (J)] that the proper officer cannot issue consolidated orders by clubbing into different assessment years for the purpose of determining the liability under Section 74 of the Act. It is further pointed out that the High Court of Karnataka in M/s Bangalore Golf Club (Supra) had taken a view that a composite show cause notice by clubbing different assessment notices cannot be issued. It is further pointed out that the Madras High Court in M/s Titan Company Limited v. Joint Commissioner of GST [ W.P. No.33164 of 2023 ] also has taken a similar view.

5. On the other hand, Sri. V.K. Shamsudheen, the learned Senior Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents relied on the decision of the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court in Riocare India Private Limited v. Assistant Commissioner CGST [ (2025) 26 Centax 339 (Bom.) ] to contend to the proposition that there is nothing in the CGST/SGST Act, 2017 prohibiting the proper officer from