Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority UBR LEGAL ADVOCATES vs Union of India — WP/4002/2025

Summary of WP/4002/2025 Case: Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority v. Union of India and State of Maharashtra and Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs Court: High Court of Bombay (Judges: G. S. Kulkarni and Aarti Sathe, JJ.) Date: 17 April 2026 Outcome Case Referred to Larger Bench – The court did not decide the petitions on merits. Instead, recognizing a significant conflict of judicial opinion across High Courts, the court referred five critical questions of law to a larger bench for determination. Key Issue Whether the GST Department can issue a single consolidated show-cause notice covering multiple financial years under Sections 73/74 of the CGST Act, 2017. Legal Conflict The court identified a "cleavage of opinion" among High Courts: - Against consolidated notices: Bombay (Goa bench) in *Milroc Good Earth Developers*, Bombay (Nagpur), Kerala, Madras, and Karnataka High Courts held that separate show-cause notices must be issued for each financial year - Permitting consolidated notices: Delhi and Allahabad High Courts held that consolidated notices are permissible; the Supreme Court dismissed Special Leave Petitions in *Mathur Polymers* and *Ambika Traders* without interfering with Delhi HC's decision Court's Observation The bench noted that: 1. The limitation periods under Section 73(10)/74(10) are year-specific 2. Sections 73(3) and 74(3) use language like "for any period" and "such periods," suggesting flexibility in notice issuance 3. The scheme distinguishes between return-based assessment (linked to tax periods) and adjudication proceedings (dispute-based, potentially spanning multiple years) Questions Referred to Larger Bench 1. Whether sub-section (10) controls sub-section (1) regarding consolidated notices 2. Whether sub-section (10) prohibits consolidated notices per se 3. Effect of Section 160 CGST Act on consolidated proceedings 4. Whether *Milroc* decision lays down correct law 5. Legal position following Supreme Court's *Mathur Polymers* order under Article 141 Interim Relief: All existing interim orders continue until the larger bench decides. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.