2026:BHC-NAG:734-DB IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

WRIT PETITION NO. 6135 OF 2025 (Rushiraj Infra, through its Partner Shri Satish Rushiraj Hiranwar Vs. Union of India & Ors.)

__________________________________________________________________________

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's orders.

and Registrar's Orders.

Mr. A.J. Bhoot, Counsel for the petitioner.

Mr. R.K. Maheshwari, Counsel for respondent nos. 2 and 3.

.....

CORAM : ANIL L. PANSARE AND NIVEDITA P. MEHTA, JJ.

JANUARY 16, 2026 Heard.

2] Challenge is to the show cause notice dated 27/6/2025 issued under Section 74 of The Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (for short “CGST Act”) by respondent no.2 – Deputy Commissioner, CGST, Nagpur. The notice issued pertains to the Financial Years 2018-19 to 2023-24, saying that the petitioner has, during this period, suppressed taxable value, and thereby made short payments of Central Goods and Service Tax.

3] The argument is that clubbing of period, while issuing notice under Section 74 of the CGST Act, is not permissible. The Counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue involved is covered by a judgment passed by the Division Bench of this Court at Goa in M/s. Milroc Good Earth Developers Vs. Union of India & Ors. [Writ Petition No. 2203/2025 decided on 9/10/2025], wherein, the Court held that if an authority lacks jurisdiction to have composite assessment for different tax periods/assessment years, then the formality of responding to show cause notice shall not be encouraged.

While doing so, the Court considered relevant provisions of the CGST Act, and held as under :

“18. When we have perused the scheme of assessment and payment of tax, we find that the taxes payable under the Act commensurate with Return filed for ‘each tax period’ and this is may be in the form of selfassessment or provisional assessment as provided in the Act. However, what is important to note is that there is a prescription of period of five years of due date on which ‘annual Return’ is filed for the relevant financial year and provision of payment and recovery is also included in the statutory scheme in form of Section 73 and 74, which underwent significant amendment by the Act 15 of 2024 and the provision as per sub- section (12) shall be applicable for determination of tax pertaining to the period up to Financial Year 2023-24 and for financial year 2024-25 and onwards, the provision under Section 74A will be relevant.

19. From the perusal of the entire Scheme, it is evidently clear to us that the statutory provision for assessment of tax for each financial year expect the Show Cause Notice to be issued at least 3 months prior to the time limit specified in Section 73(10) and 74(10) of the Act, for issuance of assessment order as sub-section (10) provide that the proper officer shall issue the order within a period of five years from the due date for furnishing of annual Return for the financial year to which the tax not paid/short paid or input tax credit wrongly availed or utilised relates to or within five years from the date of erroneous Return. Thus, there is limitation prescribed for demand of tax and its recovery.

The Act of 2017, therefore involve a definite tax period, based on the filing of the Return, which can be either monthly or annual Return and if the assessment is based on annual Return, the tax period shall be the relevant financial year.

In the light of the statutory scheme, we find that there is no scope for consolidating various financial years/tax period which is attempted by the impugned Show Cause Notices assailed in the Petition.”

4] As could be seen, the Division Bench has, in categorical terms, held that there is no scope for consolidating various financial years/tax period while issuing show cause notice under Section 74 of the CGST Act.

5] The aforesaid judgment was then considered by the Division Bench of this Court in Rite Water S