M/S. Sri Sai Steels, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh, on 3 July, 2025

Summary of High Court Order

Note: The provided text is not a final judgment but an interim procedural order passed during a hearing of a batch of writ petitions. The summary reflects the issues raised and the procedural outcome of this specific hearing.

1. Outcome

The High Court has adjourned the hearing for this batch of writ petitions to 31.07.2025. All interim orders (such as stay on recovery proceedings) that were previously granted in these cases will continue to be in effect until the next date of hearing.

2. Core Issue

The central legal question across this batch of petitions is the constitutional and statutory validity of notifications issued by the Central and State Governments under Section 168-A of the CGST/SGST Acts, 2017. These notifications extended the statutory time limit for issuing adjudication orders under Section 73 for the financial years 2017-18, 2018-19, and 2019-20.

The key issue is whether the government had the legal authority to extend these deadlines, and if so, whether the conditions required for invoking Section 168-A (i.e., a force majeure event) were actually present.

3. Key Facts

• A large number of taxpayers (the petitioners) have filed writ petitions before the Andhra Pradesh High Court.
• The GST authorities issued Show Cause Notices and/or passed assessment orders (demanding tax, interest, and penalty) against these taxpayers for financial years 2017-18 onwards.
• These orders were passed after the original statutory deadline prescribed in Section 73(10) of the GST Acts had expired.
• The authorities relied on the extension of these deadlines granted through Notification No. 9/2023-Central Tax, Notification No. 56/2023-Central Tax, and corresponding State GOs, which were issued under the special powers of Section 168-A.
• The petitioners have challenged both the validity of these extension notifications and the legality of the assessment orders passed against them.

4. Arguments (of the Petitioners)

The primary arguments raised by the petitioners are:
* Ultra Vires: The notifications extending the limitation period are ultra vires (beyond the powers of) Section 168-A of the CGST/SGST Acts.
* No Force Majeure: The power under Section 168-A can only be invoked in exceptional circumstances of force majeure (e.g., war, epidemic, flood, or any other catastrophe) that prevent the authorities from performing their duties. The petitioners contend that no such event existed during the period when these notifications were issued, which would have justified a blanket extension of timelines for completing assessments.
* Arbitrary and Unconstitutional: The extensions are a colourable exercise of power, manifestly arbitrary, and violate the right to equality under Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
* Time-Barred Orders: Since the notifications extending the deadline are illegal, the assessment and penalty orders passed in reliance on them are barred by limitation and, therefore, are void and non-est in the eyes of the law.

5. Court’s Reasoning

The provided document is a procedural order, not a final judgment. Therefore, it does not contain the Court's detailed reasoning or final decision on the merits of the arguments. By continuing the interim orders, the Court has implicitly acknowledged that the petitioners have presented a prima facie case that requires detailed consideration.

6. Statutory References

• Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (CGST Act):
  • Section 73: Determination of tax not paid or short paid for reasons other than fraud.
  • Section 73(10): Prescribes the original time limit for issuing an order (three years from the due date of the annual return).
  • Section 74: Determination of tax not paid or short paid by reason of fraud, wilful misstatement, or suppression of facts.
  • Section 168-A: Power of Government to extend time limits in special circumstances (force majeure).
  • Section 16(2)(c) & 16(4): Conditions for availing Input Tax Credit (challenged in some petitions).
• Constitution of India:
  • Article 14: Right to equality.
  • Article 19(1)(g): Right to practice any profession, or to carry on any occupation, trade or business.
  • Article 226: Power of High Courts to issue certain writs.
• Notifications Challenged:
  • Notification No. 09/2023-Central Tax, dated 31.03.2023.
  • Notification No. 56/2023-Central Tax, dated 28.12.2023.
  • Corresponding State Government Orders (e.g., G.O.Ms.No.221).

7. Precedents Cited (by Petitioners)

• India Cements case ((1990)1 SCC 12): Cited by some petitioners in relation to the merits of their specific tax liability, not on the issue of limitation.
• High Court order in W.P. No. 10263/2020: Cited in one petition regarding the applicability of Section 16(4) of the CGST Act.