Patna High Court Rejects Challenging Notices Extending Timetable for Issuance of Orders U/S 73(10) of CGST Act

Patna High Court Dismissed a petition challenging the Notifications extending the timetable for issuance of Orders under Section 73(10) of the GST Act.

The Division Bench consists of: Chief Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice Partha Sarthy It was dealing with the case in which the assessees/plaintiffs had filed writ petitions against Notification Nos. 13/2022-Central Tax, 9/2023-Central Tax and 56/2023-Central Tax extending the dates for issuing orders under Section 73(10) of the GST Act.

In this case, the assessee/petitioners challenged the assessment orders of 2017-18, 2018-19 and 2019-20 mainly on the grounds of limitation. Under both the GST legislations, the last date for filing annual returns for a financial year was 31 December of that financial year under Section 44.

Assessment orders were passed on an extension basis; has exceeded the three-year period as of December 31 of the year in question; this is the limitation provided under Section 73(10).

The assessee further submitted that the Notifications received on 05.07.2022, 31.03.2023 and 20.12.2023 respectively under Section 168A of the CGST Act are not maintainable and tenable as force majeure the condition of the pandemic situation is not fulfilled; For the simple reason that by then the entire world had resumed operations. There was no pandemic situation at the time the relevant notifications were made and therefore it was not possible to extend the limitation period.

The Board stated that if the maturity date specified in Article 44 of the GST Law is valid, the limitation for placing orders under Article 73(10) of the GST Law will end on (i) 31.12.2021 (2017) respectively. -18), (ii) 31.12.2022 (2018-19) and (iii) 31.12.2023 (2019-20).

The Bench observed that the Government had not extended the time limit given by the Supreme Court through the impugned notifications. Despite the risk of duplication, the extended return filing date under Section 44(10) of the GST Act for the years 2017-18, 2018-19 and 2019-20 is 07.02.2020, 31.12.2020 and 31.03 respectively. 2021.

Therefore, the three-year period under Section 73(10) of the GST Act starts from these dates and will normally end on 07.02.2023, 31.12.2023 and 31.03.2024 respectively. For the period between 15.03.2020 and 28.02.2022 for the year 2017-18; 2 years minus 14 days enters the statute of limitations period. Therefore, the Board stated that the period of 1 year, 11 months and 16 days for the year 2017-18 should be excluded, which would extend the statute of limitations until 21.01.2025.

The bench was of the opinion that: “The non-obstructive provision in Section 168A of the GST Act empowers the Government, on the advice of the Council, to extend the time limit specified or prescribed and notified in the GST Act in respect of actions that cannot be completed and performed. due to force majeure and by subsection (2) such notifications are authorized to have retroactive effect. The statement defines force majeure; This undoubtedly includes the COVID-19 pandemic situation. It is not possible to limit the authority granted in this way to its use in the event of a force majeure situation.”

The Board noted that in the financial year 2018-19, the period between 01.01.2021 and 28.02.2022 should be excluded from the three-year period starting from the date of filing extended returns of corrected returns for that year; i.e.: 31.03.2020 to 31.12.2023. 01 years 02 months thus excluded will extend the limitation from 31.12.2023 to 28.02.2025 for the assessment year 2018-19. Similarly, the extended return filing date for the financial year 2019-20 falls on 31.03.2021 and the limitation under Section 73(10) of the GST Act extends to 31.03.2024.

“The period excluded due to the Covid-19 pandemic and falling within the limitation period will be 11 months, which will enable the limitation under Section 73(10) of the GST Act to be extended from 31.03.2024 to 28.02.2025. ” bench added.

Considering the above, the trial court dismissed the petition.

Case Title: M/s Barhonia Engicon Private Limited v. State of Bihar

Case Number: Civil Writ Case No. 4180, Dated 2024

Petitioner / Considered Counsel: DV Pathy, Dr. Avinash Poddar, Bijoy Kumar Gupta and Aman Raza

Respondent Counsel/Section: PK Shahi for the State and Dr. K N Singh

Click Here to Read/Download the Order