Oasis Realty UBR LEGAL ADVOCATES vs Union of India — HCBM20362992025

Due Admission - 1

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

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

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

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

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.

High On Board (Hob)

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

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

At 3.00 P.M.

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

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

First hearing

Initial hearing scheduled

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

Case filed