Stuti Comtrade Private Limited vs Union of India Advocate - SUMAN DAS — HCBM20119012025

Summary of WP(L) No. 11901 of 2025 - Stuti Comtrade Private Limited Case Petitioner: Stuti Comtrade Private Limited Respondents: Union of India, Additional Director DGGI, Additional Commissioner CGST Court: High Court of Bombay (Division Bench of Justices G.S. Kulkarni and Aarti Sathe) Date: 17 April 2026 Key Issue Whether consolidated/single show-cause notices combining multiple financial years under Sections 73/74 of the CGST Act, 2017 are legally permissible, or whether each financial year requires a separate notice. Court's Decision Petitions Dismissed & Matter Referred to Larger Bench The Court found conflicting judicial precedents across High Courts and recognized significant legal issues requiring determination by a Larger Bench. The Court dismissed the petitions but noted: 1. There is grave doubt on whether sub-section (10)'s limitation period controls the issuance of consolidated notices under sub-section (1) 2. The plain language of Sections 73(3) and 74(3) permit notices "for any period" other than those covered initially 3. Sub-sections (9) and (10) prescribe limitation for passing orders, not limitations on issuing show-cause notices—these are separate statutory concepts Key Observations Against the Petitioners (Milroc decision): - The Division Bench expressed doubt that limitation provisions restrict issuance authority - Sections 73(3)/(4) and 74(3)/(4) explicitly allow statements for other periods - The legislature consciously avoided restricting notices to single financial years in adjudication proceedings In Petitioners' Favor (Milroc reasoning): - Shows each financial year as separate unit with distinct limitations - Consolidation frustrates year-specific defenses available to assessees Questions Referred to Larger Bench The Court identified five critical questions requiring larger bench consideration: 1. Whether sub-section (10) controls sub-section (1) operations regarding consolidated notices 2. Whether sub-section (10) per se prohibits consolidated show-cause notices 3. Effect of Section 160 on consolidated proceedings 4. Correctness of Milroc Good Earth Developers judgment 5. Legal position established by Supreme Court's Mathur Polymers dismissal order under Article 141 Interim Relief All previously granted interim orders continue until the Larger Bench decides the issues. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.