CTL Logistics India Private Limited UBR LEGAL ADVOCATES vs Union of India — WP/2031/2026

Case under Central Goods and Service Tax Act Section 74. Status: Due Admission - 1. Next hearing: 09th July 2026.

Due Admission - 1 Next hearing 09-Jul-2026 this date has passed

CNR: HCBM010065802026

e-Filing Number

07-02-2026

Filing Number

WP/3784/2026

Filing Date

07-Feb-2026

Registration No

WP/2031/2026

Registration Date

10-Feb-2026

Judge

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

Coram

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

Bench Type

Division

Category

INDIRECT TAXES ( 17 )

Sub-Category

GST Goods and Services Tax ( 100 )

Judicial Branch

Civil

Last updated 27-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Central Goods and Service Tax Act Section 74

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.CTL Logistics India Private Limited UBR LEGAL ADVOCATES

  2. 2.Commissioner, CGST and C Ex, Belapur

    Adv. UBR LEGAL ADVOCATES

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Union of India

    Adv. ,SUMAN DAS,SUMAN DAS,SUMAN DAS 1123

  2. 2.Joint Commissioner CGST and C Ex, Belapur

  3. 3.State of Maharashtra

Case History

  1. 09-Jul-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 09-Jul-2026

    Due Admission - 1

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

  3. 22-Apr-2026

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

  4. 17-Apr-2026

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

  5. 17-Apr-2026

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

    Summary of WP/2031/2026 (CTL Logistics India Private Limited) Court: Bombay High Court (Division Bench: Justices G.S. Kulkarni and Aarti Sathe) Date: 17 April 2026 Key Issue: Whether consolidated/bunched show-cause notices covering multiple financial years under Sections 73/74 of the CGST Act, 2017 are permissible Order Petitions Dismissed (with direction to constitute Larger Bench) The Court dismissed all petitions in this batch challenging consolidated show-cause notices issued for multiple financial years. However, the Court identified significant legal issues requiring determination by a Larger Bench due to conflicting High Court judgments on this issue. Critical Findings The Division Bench held: 1. Consolidated notices ARE permissible — Sections 73(1) and 74(1) read with Section 73(3)/74(3) do NOT restrict issuance of show-cause notices to single tax periods 2. Limitation provisions (Subsections 10) do NOT restrict notice issuance — Subsection (10) prescribes limitation for passing *orders*, not for issuing notices. These are separate statutory concepts. 3. Nature of ITC disputes justifies consolidation — For fraudulent ITC availment cases, transactions often span multiple years; consolidation enables proper investigation 4. Supreme Court precedent favors consolidation — The Supreme Court's dismissal of the Special Leave Petition in *Mathur Polymers* (7 November 2025) establishes that consolidated notices are valid Questions Referred to Larger Bench 1. Whether subsection (10) controls subsection (1) regarding consolidated notices 2. Whether subsection (10) *per se* prohibits consolidated notices 3. Effect of Section 160 CGST Act on consolidated proceedings 4. Whether *Milroc Good Earth Developers* decision (holding consolidation invalid) is correct 5. Legal position established by Supreme Court's order in *Mathur Polymers* Relief Granted - All interim orders previously passed continue until the Larger Bench decides Status: Case adjourned pending Larger Bench constitution by Chief Justice. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  6. 13-Feb-2026

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

  7. 13-Feb-2026

    At 3.00 P.M.

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

  8. 12-Feb-2026

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

  9. 12-Feb-2026

    At 3.00 P.M.

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

  10. 11-Feb-2026

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

  11. 11-Feb-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  12. 07-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. WP/2031/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary of WP/2031/2026 (CTL Logistics India Private Limited) Court: Bombay High Court (Division Bench: Justices G.S. Kulkarni and Aarti Sathe) Date: 17 April 2026 Key Issue: Whether consolidated/bunched show-cause notices covering multiple financial years under Sections 73/74 of the CGST Act, 2017 are permissible Order Petitions Dismissed (with direction to constitute Larger Bench) The Court dismissed all petitions in this batch challenging consolidated show-cause notices issued for multiple financial years. However, the Court identified significant legal issues requiring determination by a Larger Bench due to conflicting High Court judgments on this issue. Critical Findings The Division Bench held: 1. Consolidated notices ARE permissible — Sections 73(1) and 74(1) read with Section 73(3)/74(3) do NOT restrict issuance of show-cause notices to single tax periods 2. Limitation provisions (Subsections 10) do NOT restrict notice issuance — Subsection (10) prescribes limitation for passing *orders*, not for issuing notices. These are separate statutory concepts. 3. Nature of ITC disputes justifies consolidation — For fraudulent ITC availment cases, transactions often span multiple years; consolidation enables proper investigation 4. Supreme Court precedent favors consolidation — The Supreme Court's dismissal of the Special Leave Petition in *Mathur Polymers* (7 November 2025) establishes that consolidated notices are valid Questions Referred to Larger Bench 1. Whether subsection (10) controls subsection (1) regarding consolidated notices 2. Whether subsection (10) *per se* prohibits consolidated notices 3. Effect of Section 160 CGST Act on consolidated proceedings 4. Whether *Milroc Good Earth Developers* decision (holding consolidation invalid) is correct 5. Legal position established by Supreme Court's order in *Mathur Polymers* Relief Granted - All interim orders previously passed continue until the Larger Bench decides Status: Case adjourned pending Larger Bench constitution by Chief Justice. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case