Bench
Dhiraj Singh Thakur CJ, R Raghunandan Rao J
Acts & Sections
Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 §73
Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 §73(10)
Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 §168-A
Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 §20
Constitution §Article 14
Constitution §Article 226
Also reported in
This judgment disposed of connected matters. The same reasons were delivered in
the following 4 cases.
Vivek Enterprises vs Union Of India
W.P. No. 12580 of 2024 along with W.P.Nos. 6084, 6104, 8363, 12591, 12593, 12835, 13524, 13824, 13887, 14860, 16831, 16871, 16995, 18241, 18309, 18387
Sterling And Wilson Private Limited vs The Union Of India
W.P. No. 12580 of 2024 along with W.P.Nos. 6084, 6104, 8363, 12591, 12593, 12835, 13524, 13824, 13887, 14860, 16831, 16871, 16995, 18241, 18309, 18387
Bhavani Furnitures vs Assistant Commissioner
W.P. No. 12580 of 2024 along with W.P.Nos. 6084, 6104, 8363, 12591, 12593, 12835, 13524, 13824, 13887, 14860, 16831, 16871, 16995, 18241, 18309, 18387
Headnote
AI-drafted · Reviewed and approved
These writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenged Notification No. 9/2023-Central Tax dated 31-03-2023 and G.O. Ms. No. 221 Revenue (Commercial Taxes) Department dated 17-05-2023, issued under Section 168-A of the CGST/SGST Acts, 2017, extending the period of limitation prescribed under Section 73(10) of the CGST Act, 2017 for the Financial Year 2017-18 till 31-12-2023, as ultra vires Section 168-A of the CGST Act, 2017, manifestly arbitrary, and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
The petitioners further sought quashing of the respective assessment, penalty and interest orders passed under Section 73 of the CGST and SGST Acts, 2017 read with Section 20 of the IGST Act, 2017 for the Financial Year 2017-18, on the ground that the same were barred by limitation consequent upon the impugned notifications being ultra vires, and also challenged the rejection of input tax credit without furnishing details of sellers whose registrations had been cancelled.
The batch of writ petitions was heard together by a Division Bench comprising the Chief Justice and R. Raghunandan Rao J. The judgment was authored by R. Raghunandan Rao J. The ultimate result of the proceedings is not set out in the extracted portion of the judgment.
Catchwords:
GST · CGST Act 2017 · SGST Act 2017 · IGST Act 2017 · Section 168-A · Section 73 · limitation · extension of limitation · Notification 9/2023-Central Tax · ultra vires · Article 14 · Article 226 · mandamus · assessment order · input tax credit · Financial Year 2017-18
Headnote © LegalFirms.in. Section 52(1)(q)(iv) of the Copyright Act, 1957 allows a court's
judgment to be reproduced unless the court has prohibited it.
Full Judgment Text
[Cites 30, Cited by 0]
Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
M/S. Shall Constructions, vs The Assistant Commissioner St, on 3 July, 2025
Author: R Raghunandan Rao
Bench: R Raghunandan Rao
lN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH: AT AMARAV
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF JULY,
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
:PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE SRI DHIRAJ S]NGH THAKUR, THE CHIEF JtyLiffi
AND
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO
WRIT PETITION NO: 12580 OF 2024 along with W.P.Nos.6084, 6104, 8363,
12591,12593] 12835,13524,13824,13887,14860,16831,16871) 16995]
1
Full text available to subscribers
Subscribe to access complete judgment text, daily digests, and AI-powered legal research tools.
For informational and research purposes only.
View Subscription Plans →
Annual plans from ₹1,599 + GST.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.
Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.
