Anandispatudyog Limited vs The Assistant Commissioner St on 3 July, 2025

It is important to note that the provided text is not a final judgment but a procedural/interim order from the High Court of Andhra Pradesh, which lists a batch of similar writ petitions for future hearing and continues the previously granted interim orders.

Summary of High Court Proceedings

Title: Anandispatudyog Limited vs The Assistant Commissioner St (and other connected matters)
Date of Order: 3 July, 2025
Court: High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati
Bench: The Hon’ble Chief Justice Dhiraj Singh Thakur and The Hon’ble Sri Justice R Raghunandan Rao

1. Outcome

This is an interim order, not a final judgment. The High Court has adjourned the hearing for this batch of writ petitions to 31st July 2025. All interim orders granted previously in these cases shall continue to be in effect until the next hearing date.

2. Core Issue

The central legal question before the High Court is whether the Central and State Governments have the authority under Section 168-A of the CGST/SGST Act, 2017 to issue notifications extending the statutory time limits for completing assessment proceedings under Section 73 of the Act for the financial years 2017-18, 2018-19, and 2019-20.

3. Key Facts

• This is a batch of numerous writ petitions filed by various taxpayers (the Petitioners).
• The Petitioners were issued Show Cause Notices and/or Assessment/Penalty Orders under Section 73 of the CGST/SGST Acts for financial years 2017-18, 2018-19, and 2019-20.
• These notices and orders were issued after the expiry of the original limitation period prescribed under Section 73(10) of the CGST Act.
• The tax authorities (the Respondents) relied on various notifications (e.g., Notification No. 09/2023-Central Tax and Notification No. 56/2023-Central Tax and corresponding State GOs) to issue these notices/orders, claiming the limitation period was validly extended.
• These notifications were issued by invoking powers under Section 168-A, which allows for the extension of time limits in force majeure situations where an action cannot be completed due to circumstances beyond the government's control.

4. Arguments

Petitioners' Arguments (as inferred from the prayers in the writ petitions):

• Ultra Vires: The notifications extending the time limits are ultra vires (beyond the powers of) Section 168-A of the CGST/SGST Acts.
• No Force Majeure: Section 168-A can only be invoked in specific force majeure events like war, epidemic, flood, etc., which make it impossible for the authorities to perform their functions. The petitioners argue that such conditions did not exist when these extensions were granted, especially for periods long after the COVID-19 pandemic's peak.
• Arbitrariness: The extensions are manifestly arbitrary and violate the fundamental right to equality under Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
• Barred by Limitation: Consequently, the assessment orders and show-cause notices issued based on these invalid extensions are barred by limitation, legally non-existent (non-est), and should be quashed.
• Other Challenges: Some petitioners also challenged the constitutional validity of other provisions, such as Section 16(2)(c) (linking ITC to supplier's tax payment) and Section 16(4) (time limit for claiming ITC).

Respondents' Arguments:
The provided text does not contain the counter-arguments of the Revenue Department.

5. Court’s Reasoning

The provided text is a procedural order for adjournment. The Court has not provided any reasoning on the merits of the case. It has not yet adjudicated upon the validity of Section 168-A or the legality of the notifications extending the limitation periods. The matter is pending consideration.

6. Statutory References

• Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (CGST Act) / Andhra Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (APGST Act):
  • Section 16(2)(c) & 16(2)(d): Conditions for availing Input Tax Credit (ITC).
  • Section 16(4): Time limit for availing ITC.
  • Section 73: Determination of tax not paid or short paid for reasons other than fraud.
  • Section 73(10): Time limit for issuing the order under Section 73.
  • Section 74: Determination of tax not paid or short paid by reason of fraud.
  • Section 168-A: Power of Government to extend time limits in special circumstances (force majeure clause).
• Constitution of India:
  • Article 14: Right to equality.
  • Article 19(1)(g): Right to practise any profession, or to carry on any occupation, trade or business.
  • Article 226: Power of High Courts to issue certain writs.
  • Article 265: No tax shall be levied or collected except by authority of law.
  • Article 300-A: Right to property.
• Notifications Challenged:
  • Notification No. 09/2023-Central Tax, dated 31.03.2023
  • Notification No. 56/2023-Central Tax, dated 28.12.2023
  • G.O. Ms. No. 221 (Andhra Pradesh), dated 17.05.2023
  • G.O. Ms. No. 2 (Andhra Pradesh), dated 03.01.2024

7. Precedents Cited

The following cases were mentioned in the prayers of some of the writ petitions:
* India Cements Ltd. vs. Collector of Central Excise [(1990) 1 SCC 12]
* An order of the High Court in W.P. No.10263/2020 was referenced in one petition.