Notification extending time limit not applicable for passing of order under Section 73 for FY 2017-18


Quick Summary
The Allahabad High Court has ruled that a notification extending the time limit for passing orders under Section 73 of the CGST Act does not apply to financial year 2017-18. The court found that the original time limit for passing such orders had already expired before the notification came into effect. Consequently, the department's orders issued beyond the original deadline were quashed.

Court :
Allahabad High Court

Brief :
The Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of M/s. AV Pharma v. State of UP [Writ Tax No. 264 of 2024 dated November 12, 2024] allowed the writ petition and quashed the order issued by the Department for FY 2017-2018 stating that the orders have been issued beyond the prescribed time limit thereby holding that as the time limit for passing of order under Section 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 ("the CGST Act") for the Impugned Period i.e. February 05, 2023 has expired prior to the date of notification coming into effect i.e. March 31, 2023, thus, the Notification extending the time limit for passing of Impugned Order under Section 79 would not be applicable.

Citation :
Writ Tax No. 264 of 2024 dated November 12, 2024

The Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of M/s. AV Pharma v. State of UP [Writ Tax No. 264 of 2024 dated November 12, 2024] allowed the writ petition and quashed the order issued by the Department for FY 2017-2018 stating that the orders have been issued beyond the prescribed time limit thereby holding that as the time limit for passing of order under Section 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 ("the CGST Act") for the Impugned Period i.e. February 05, 2023 has expired prior to the date of notification coming into effect i.e. March 31, 2023, thus, the Notification extending the time limit for passing of Impugned Order under Section 79 would not be applicable.

Facts:

M/s. AV Pharma ("the Petitioner") through its Proprietor, filed a writ petition for setting aside of order dated October 05, 2024 issued in Form GST DRC-13 and December 02, 2023 issued in Form GST DRC-07 ("the Impugned Orders") for the period of FY 2017-2018 ("the Impugned Period") on the ground that the Impugned Orders passed are barred by sub-section (10) of Section 73 of the CGST Act, as the said Impugned Orders have been passed beyond the prescribed time limit, i.e. three years from the due date of filing of annual return, ending on February 05, 2023.

Issue:

Whether Notification extending time limit would be applicable for passing of order under Section 73 for FY 2017-2018?

Held:

The Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Writ Tax No. 264 of 2024 held as under:

  • Noted that, for the justification of time limit, reliance was placed upon State Notification No. 515/XI-2-23-9(47)/17-T.C.215-U.P.Act-1-2017-Order-(273)-2023 dated April 24, 2023("the Notification"), which has been given retrospective effect only w.e.f. March 31, 2023 which has been adopted from notification issued by Central Government bearing Notification No. 09/2023 - Central Tax dated March 31, 2023, thereby extending the time limit for passing of order under Section 73 for the Impugned Period till December 31, 2023.
  • Further Noted that, as the time limit for passing of order under Section 73 of the CGST Act for the Impugned Period i.e. February 05, 2023 has expired prior to the date of notification coming into effect i.e. March 31, 2023, the Notification extending the time limit for passing of Impugned Order under Section 79 would not be applicable.
  • Further Opined that, the Impugned Orders are beyond the prescribed time lime under Section 73(10) of the CGST Act, as applicable during the Impugned Period.
  • Held that, the Impugned Orders are quashed and the writ petition is allowed.

OFFICIAL JUDGMENT COPY HAS BEEN ATTACHED

FAQ :

The main issue was whether a notification extending the time limit for passing orders under Section 73 of the CGST Act was applicable for the financial year 2017-18.

The ruling was made by the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court.

The financial year in question was 2017-18.

The department's orders were quashed because they were issued beyond the prescribed time limit under Section 73(10) of the CGST Act, and the notification extending the time limit was not applicable.

The original time limit for passing orders under Section 73 for FY 2017-18 expired on February 5, 2023.

The notification extending the time limit came into effect on March 31, 2023.

 
downloaded 412 times



Judgement posted by

Service

FCA, FCS LLB with21 Yrs of Experience inTaxation Indirect and Direct: Education Qualification: B.Com (Hons) Chartered Accountants Company Secretary LLB Qualified SAP FI/CO Consultants Professional Membership: Chairmanof Indirect Tax Committee of PHD Chamber of Commerce Member of Indirec ... Read more

Comments




CCI Pro



Company
ARTICLESHIP 25 October 2026
Article Intern (CA Articleship)

Arpan Bohra & Co

Hyderabad

CA Inter

View Details
Company
28 October 2026
Assistant Director/ Associate Director-Finance & Accounting

Krea University

Chennai

CA

View Details
Company
30 October 2026
Asst Manager Accounts

Goodwin Pumps India Pvt Ltd

Chengalpattu

CA Inter

View Details
Company
16 October 2026
CA article trainee

Zerdi & Co. Chartered Accountants

Pune

CA Inter

View Details
Company
Featured ARTICLESHIP 28 October 2026
CA- Inter and Articles

N N V Satish & Co.,

Hyderabad

CA Inter

View Details
Company
08 October 2026
Accounts and Tax Associate

POOJA R TELI & CO

Pune

CA Inter

View Details
Company
12 October 2026
AUDIT , ACCOUNTS AND TAXATION

KDSS

New Delhi

B.Com

View Details
Company
08 October 2026
Account Executive

Elite Taxation

New Delhi

CA Foundation

View Details