FACTS OF THE CASE

In C.H. Robinson Worldwide Freight India Pvt. Ltd. vs. Additional Commissioner, CGST‑Delhi‑South & Ors., the Petitioner challenged a Show Cause Notice (SCN) dated 31 May 2024, which was ultimately issued on 12 August 2024, by the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Department. The SCN alleged wrongful availment of Input Tax Credit (ITC) for Financial Year 2019‑20, demanding ₹11,85,45,612/‑.

The Petitioner contended that the SCN was barred by limitation under Sections 73(2) and 73(10) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, because it was not served at least three months prior to the statutory outer limit prescribed for issuance of an adjudication order.

It was undisputed that Notification 56/2023 extended the time for issuing an order under Section 73 for FY 2019‑20 to 31 August 2024. However, the SCN was dispatched only on 12 August 2024 — less than the three‑month minimum period before the extended limit — and was served to the wrong address of the Petitioner. 

Issues Involved

  1. Whether issuance of a Show Cause Notice after the three‑month minimum period required under Section 73(2) read with Section 73(10) of the CGST Act is barred by limitation.
  2. Whether a technical glitch or delayed dispatch justifies issuance of the SCN beyond the statutory timeframe.
  3. Whether serving the SCN to an incorrect address affects limitation compliance. 

Petitioner’s Arguments

  • The impugned SCN was issued and served beyond the statutory period as per Sections 73(2) and 73(10) of the CGST Act.
  • The three‑month pre‑order period required for valid issuance of a SCN was not adhered to.
  • The SCN was communicated from an incorrect address, infringing statutory timelines. 

Respondent’s Arguments

  • The CGST Department claimed a technical glitch prevented timely issuance of the DRC‑01 form, leading to the delayed dispatch on 12 August 2024.
  • Additional records suggested dispatch from another address on 3 June 2024. 

Court’s Findings / Order

The Delhi High Court, in a Division Bench judgment by Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Shail Jain, held that:

A three‑month period is mandatory between issuance of a SCN and the statutory deadline for adjudication under Section 73(10).
 A technical glitch cannot justify delay in issuing the SCN beyond the statutory requirement.
 Serving the SCN at an incorrect address, after the Petitioner had updated its address, further undermined the validity of the notice.

Accordingly, the SCN dated 28/31 May 2024 (dispatched 3 June/12 August 2024) was held barred by limitation, and the petition was allowed, quashing the SCN and any consequent orders. 

Important Clarifications

  • Limitation compliance under Sections 73(2) & 73(10) is mandatory; mere technical errors cannot extend limitation beyond statutory periods.
  • The validity of service is critical; incorrect address service undermines limitation compliance.
  • The judgment reiterates that statutory timelines cannot be circumvented by procedural glitches.

 Link to download the order -  https://delhihighcourt.nic.in/app/showFileJudgment/75429102025CW155082024_123840.pdf

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.