Oasis Realty UBR LEGAL ADVOCATES vs Union of India — HCBM20362992025

Summary of High Court Order: Consolidated GST Show-Cause Notices Case: Batch of writ petitions including Oasis Realty v. Union of India & Ors Court: Bombay High Court (Division Bench: Justices G.S. Kulkarni & Aarti Sathe) Date: 17 April 2026 --- Issue Whether the GST Department can issue a single consolidated show-cause notice combining multiple financial years under Sections 73/74 of the CGST Act, 2017. Key Finding The petition is dismissed. The Court found no jurisdictional bar against issuing consolidated show-cause notices for multiple financial years. --- Court's Reasoning The Court conducted a detailed analysis of Sections 73 and 74 of the CGST Act and concluded: 1. Plain Reading of Statute: Sections 73(3) and 74(3) explicitly allow issuance of statements "for such periods other than those covered under sub-section (1)," indicating legislative awareness of multi-period notices. 2. Distinction Between Notice & Order: - Sub-section (1) governs issuance of show-cause notices - Sub-section (10) prescribes limitation for passing orders - These are independent statutory concepts; limitation on passing orders does NOT restrict notice issuance 3. ITC Fraud Cases: The nature of fraudulent Input Tax Credit schemes requires connecting transactions across multiple years; a single consolidated notice is appropriate. 4. Supreme Court Precedent: The Supreme Court dismissed a special leave petition in *Mathur Polymers v. UOI* (7 Nov 2025) without interfering with the Delhi High Court's decision allowing consolidated notices, establishing this as binding law under Article 141 of the Constitution. --- Contrasting Judicial Views The Court acknowledged conflicting High Court decisions: - Against consolidated notices: Milroc Good Earth Developers (Goa HC), Paras Stone Industries (Nagpur HC), and other courts citing strict interpretation - Allowing consolidated notices: Delhi HC (*Mathur Polymers*, *Ambika Traders*), Allahabad HC (*S.A. Aromatics*) --- Important Clarification The Court noted the GST Policy Wing clarification (16 Sept 2025) confirming that consolidation does NOT extend limitation periods—each financial year remains separately barred by its own limitation. --- Order for Larger Bench Despite dismissing these petitions, the Court referred 5 questions to a Larger Bench for authoritative resolution: 1. Whether sub-section (10) controls sub-section (1)'s operation 2. Whether sub-section (10) *per se* prohibits consolidated notices 3. Effect of Section 160 (defects in notices) on such proceedings 4. Correctness of *Milroc* decision 5. Legal position under *Mathur Polymers* as law of the land (Article 141) --- Interim Relief All existing interim orders in these cases continue until the Larger Bench decides. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.