Everest Fleet Private Limited PDS LEGAL vs THE UNION OF INDIA AND ORS Advocate - OMLE MAMTA RAMCHANDRA , ,Mamta Omle,Mamta Omle — WP/1122/2026

Due Admission - 1

Hon'ble The Chief Justice , Hon'ble Shri Justice Suman Shyam

Hon'ble The Chief Justice,hon'ble Shri Justice Suman ShyamView PDF

Hon'ble Shri Justice G. S. Kulkarni,hon'ble Ms Justice Aarti A. SatheView PDF

Hon'ble Shri Justice G. S. Kulkarni,hon'ble Ms Justice Aarti A. SatheView PDF

Summary of WP/1122/2026 - Everest Fleet Private Limited Case Citation: WP 1122/2026, Bombay High Court (17 April 2026) Key Parties: - Petitioner: Everest Fleet Private Limited - Respondents: Union of India, State of Maharashtra, Director General of GST Intelligence Mumbai, Additional Commissioner CGST Palghar, Additional Commissioner CGST Mumbai Central --- Issue Whether the GST Department can issue a single consolidated show-cause notice combining multiple financial years under Sections 73/74 of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act, 2017, or whether separate notices must be issued for each financial year. --- Outcome Case Referred to Larger Bench - The Division Bench declined to decide the matter and referred five critical questions of law to a Larger Bench for authoritative determination, noting conflicting judicial precedents across Indian High Courts. Key Holdings: 1. Interim relief maintained - All interim orders previously granted remain in effect pending the Larger Bench decision 2. Significant disagreement identified - The court found major conflict between: - Milroc Good Earth Developers (Goa/Bombay Benches) - prohibiting consolidated notices - Mathur Polymers & Ambika Traders (Delhi HC & Supreme Court) - permitting consolidated notices - Other HC positions (Kerala, Madras, Karnataka) 3. Supreme Court position noted - The Supreme Court's dismissal of the Special Leave Petition in *Mathur Polymers* (7 November 2025) creates binding law under Article 141 that consolidated notices are permissible in ITC fraud cases --- Questions Referred to Larger Bench 1. Whether subsection (10) of Sections 73/74 controls subsection (1), preventing consolidated notices 2. Whether subsection (10) *per se* prohibits consolidated show-cause notices 3. Effect of Section 160 (curing defects) on consolidated proceedings 4. Whether *Milroc* correctly states the law 5. What is the legal position created by the Supreme Court's *Mathur Polymers* order under Article 141 --- Significance This case involves a critical statutory interpretation dispute regarding GST assessment procedures, with implications for multi-year investigations involving fraudulent Input Tax Credit (ITC) availment and interrelated transactions spanning multiple financial years. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Hon'ble Shri Justice G. S. Kulkarni,hon'ble Ms Justice Aarti A. SatheView PDF

At 3.00 P.M.

Hon'ble Shri Justice G. S. Kulkarni , Hon'ble Ms Justice Aarti A. Sathe

Hon'ble Shri Justice G. S. Kulkarni,hon'ble Ms Justice Aarti A. SatheView PDF

At 3.00 P.M.

Hon'ble Shri Justice G. S. Kulkarni , Hon'ble Ms Justice Aarti A. Sathe

Hon'ble Shri Justice G. S. Kulkarni,hon'ble Ms Justice Aarti A. SatheView PDF

At 3.00 P.M.

Hon'ble Shri Justice G. S. Kulkarni , Hon'ble Ms Justice Aarti A. Sathe

Hon'ble Shri Justice G. S. Kulkarni,hon'ble Ms Justice Aarti A. SatheView PDF

Part-Heard

Hon'ble Shri Justice G. S. Kulkarni , Hon'ble Ms Justice Aarti A. Sathe

Hon'ble Shri Justice G. S. Kulkarni,hon'ble Ms Justice Aarti A. SatheView PDF

High On Board (Hob)

Hon'ble Shri Justice G. S. Kulkarni , Hon'ble Ms Justice Aarti A. Sathe

Hon'ble Shri Justice G. S. Kulkarni,hon'ble Ms Justice Aarti A. SatheView PDF

First hearing

Initial hearing scheduled

Case filed

Registration No. WP/1122/2026