Neelkanth Mansions and Infrastructure Private Limited UBR LEGAL ADVOCATES vs Union of India Through the Secretary — WP/2608/2025

Case under Central Goods and Service Tax Act Section Sec65. Next hearing: 29th July 2026.

CNR: HCBM020197592025

Next Hearing

29th July 2026

e-Filing Number

01-07-2025

Filing Number

WP/19758/2025

Filing Date

01-07-2025

Registration No

WP/2608/2025

Registration Date

11-07-2025

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

Original

Acts & Sections

Central Goods and Service Tax Act Section Sec65

Petitioner(s)

Neelkanth Mansions and Infrastructure Private Limited UBR LEGAL ADVOCATES

Respondent(s)

Union of India Through the Secretary

State of Maharashtra

The Assistant Commissioner Circle D, GST Audit II

The Superintendent of CGST Group 14, GST Audit II

The Additional Commissioner CGST Audit II

Hearing History

Judge: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE , HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUMAN SHYAM

02-12-2025

FOR CIRCULATION

29-07-2026

DUE ADMISSION - 1

13-02-2026

AT 3.00 P.M.

18-02-2026

HIGH ON BOARD (HOB)

Orders

17-04-2026
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE G. S. KULKARNI,HON'BLE MS JUSTICE AARTI A. SATHE

SUMMARY OF WP/2608/2025 (NEELKANTH MANSIONS & INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.) Case Status: Petitions DISMISSED with proceedings referred to larger bench for consideration of substantive legal questions. Key Issue: Whether consolidated/bunched show-cause notices covering multiple financial years under Sections 73/74 of the CGST Act, 2017 are permissible or constitute jurisdictional overreach. Order Details: - The Division Bench (Justices G.S. Kulkarni and Aarti Sathe) found conflicting High Court precedents on consolidated notices - While bound by the Bombay High Court coordinate bench decision in *Milroc Good Earth Developers* (which disallowed consolidated notices), the court identified significant legal issues requiring larger bench consideration - The Supreme Court's dismissal of the SLP in *Mathur Polymers* (which upheld consolidated notices) was treated as binding law under Article 141 of the Constitution - Current interim orders continue till the larger bench decides Five Questions Referred to Larger Bench: 1. Whether Section 73/74(10) limitation provisions control Section 73/74(1) notice issuance authority 2. Whether Section 73/74(10) *per se* prohibits consolidated notices for multiple years 3. Effect of Section 160 (curing defects) on consolidated proceedings 4. Whether *Milroc's* prohibition on clubbing years states correct law 5. Legal position following Supreme Court's *Mathur Polymers* order This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

SUMMARY OF WP/2608/2025 (NEELKANTH MANSIONS & INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.) Case Status: Petitions DISMISSED with proceedings referred to larger bench for consideration of substantive legal questions. Key Issue: Whether consolidated/bunched show-cause notices covering multiple financial years under Sections 73/74 of the CGST Act, 2017 are permissible or constitute jurisdictional overreach. Order Details: - The Division Bench (Justices G.S. Kulkarni and Aarti Sathe) found conflicting High Court precedents on consolidated notices - While bound by the Bombay High Court coordinate bench decision in *Milroc Good Earth Developers* (which disallowed consolidated notices), the court identified significant legal issues requiring larger bench consideration - The Supreme Court's dismissal of the SLP in *Mathur Polymers* (which upheld consolidated notices) was treated as binding law under Article 141 of the Constitution - Current interim orders continue till the larger bench decides Five Questions Referred to Larger Bench: 1. Whether Section 73/74(10) limitation provisions control Section 73/74(1) notice issuance authority 2. Whether Section 73/74(10) *per se* prohibits consolidated notices for multiple years 3. Effect of Section 160 (curing defects) on consolidated proceedings 4. Whether *Milroc's* prohibition on clubbing years states correct law 5. Legal position following Supreme Court's *Mathur Polymers* order This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

Explore other courts

Search Another Case