Facts of the Case

Green Cardamom Trading Company challenged Notification No. 09/2023-Central Tax dated 31.03.2023, the corresponding State notification G.O.Ms. No. 41 dated 05.04.2023, Notification No. 56/2023-Central Tax dated 28.12.2023 (all issued under Section 168A extending limitation for Section 73 proceedings), and the consequent assessment order dated 16.07.2024 for the assessment year 2019-20. The petitioner had not replied to the notices preceding the order, and the writ was filed well after the assessment order was passed; its bank account had also been attached pursuant to the order.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether Notifications No. 9/2023 and 56/2023-Central Tax, extending limitation under Section 168A, are valid.
  2. Whether an assessment order passed pursuant to a subsequently-vitiated extension notification, and without a reply from the assessee, should still be quashed and remitted.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • The extending notifications under Section 168A, and the consequent assessment order relying on the extended limitation, were arbitrary and illegal.

Respondent's Arguments

  • The petitioner had not replied to the notices preceding the impugned order, and the writ petition itself was filed long after the assessment order, ordinarily inviting the consistent view of the Court against belated challenges.

Court Order / Findings

  • The Court noted that a detailed order of the Principal Bench in M/s. Tata Play Limited v. Union of India, 2025 (7) TMI 772, had recently quashed Notifications No. 9 and 56 of 2023-Central Tax as vitiated and illegal — for diminishing the limitation otherwise available under the Supreme Court's Article 142 order, being based on an erroneous assumption of law, extinguishing a vested right of the authorities by curtailing limitation, and, specifically for Notification No. 56/2023, being issued even before the GST Council's recommendation and merely on GIC's recommendation, which cannot substitute for the Council.
  • That ruling had already been followed in several subsequent cases, including W.P.(MD) No. 19943 of 2025.
  • Applying Tata Play Limited, the impugned assessment order was quashed and the case remitted to the respondents to pass a fresh order on merits, while keeping open the department's liberty to proceed further in light of the outcome of the pending SLP before the Supreme Court in HCC-SEW-MEIL-AAG JV v. Assistant Commissioner of State Tax (SLP No. 4240 of 2025) against a Telangana High Court ruling on the same notifications.
  • Since the petitioner's bank account had been attached pursuant to the now-quashed order, the attachment was directed to be lifted forthwith.
  • As the petitioner had also filed a separate appeal against the same assessment order, it was directed to withdraw that appeal, with any amount already deposited to be adjusted against future liability.

Important Clarification

  • Notifications No. 9/2023 and 56/2023-Central Tax extending the Section 73 limitation under Section 168A have been held vitiated by the Madras High Court's Principal Bench in Tata Play Limited, and this reasoning is now being applied to quash individual assessment orders passed relying on that extended limitation, even where the assessee did not otherwise engage with the notice.
  • This position remains subject to the outcome of the pending Supreme Court SLP on the same notification issue arising from a Telangana High Court ruling, so departments retain liberty to act depending on that outcome.

Sections Involved

  • Section 168A, CGST Act, 2017 — power to extend time limits in special circumstances, on the GST Council's recommendation.
  • Section 73, CGST/TNGST Act, 2017 — determination of tax not involving fraud or suppression.

Decision – In Favour of

In favour of the Assessee — the assessment order is quashed on the strength of Tata Play Limited and remitted for a fresh order, with the bank attachment lifted.

Case Details

Madurai Bench of Madras High Court; W.P(MD) No. 32384 of 2025 and W.M.P.(MD) Nos. 25492 & 25494 of 2025; Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice G.R. Swaminathan; Order dated 13.11.2025.

Link to Download the Order

Click here to view/download the full order

Disclaimer

This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.