Parinee Realty Pvt Ltd LUMIERE LAW PARTNERS vs Union of India — WP/5271/2025
Case under Central Goods and Services Tax Act,2017 Section 74. Next hearing: 29th July 2026.
CNR: HCBM020416742025
Next Hearing
29th July 2026
e-Filing Number
18-12-2025
Filing Number
WP/41673/2025
Filing Date
19-12-2025
Registration No
WP/5271/2025
Registration Date
24-12-2025
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
Petitioner(s)
Parinee Realty Pvt Ltd LUMIERE LAW PARTNERS
Respondent(s)
Union of India
The Commissioner CGST, Mumbai West
The Joint Commissioner, CGST, Mumbai West
Hearing History
Judge: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE , HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUMAN SHYAM
DUE ADMISSION - 1
AT 3.00 P.M.
HIGH ON BOARD (HOB)
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 29-07-2026 | DUE ADMISSION - 1 |
| 13-02-2026 | AT 3.00 P.M. |
| 18-02-2026 | HIGH ON BOARD (HOB) |
Orders
CASE SUMMARY: WP/5271/2025 Case: Parinee Realty Pvt Ltd v. Union of India & The Commissioner CGST, Mumbai West Court: High Court of Bombay Date: 17 April 2026 Outcome: Petitions dismissed; case referred to Larger Bench for consideration of substantial legal questions. --- Key Issue Whether the GST Department can issue a single consolidated show-cause notice under Sections 73/74 of the CGST Act covering multiple financial years, or whether separate notices must be issued for each financial year. --- Court's Decision The Division Bench (Judges Kulkarni & Sathe) found that: 1. Consolidated notices are permissible – The operation of Section 73(1)/74(1) is not controlled by the limitation period in Section 73(10)/74(10), which governs only the issuance of final orders, not show-cause notices. 2. Each year remains separately time-barred – The consolidated notice does not extend limitation periods; each financial year remains subject to its own 3-year (Section 73) or 5-year (Section 74) limit for issuing orders. 3. Larger Bench referral – Due to conflicting High Court decisions (Bombay's *Milroc* holding against consolidated notices vs. Delhi's *Mathur Polymers* holding in favor, recently upheld by Supreme Court dismissal), the matter is referred to a Larger Bench to settle the law. --- Status All interim orders continued pending Larger Bench decision. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
CASE SUMMARY: WP/5271/2025 Case: Parinee Realty Pvt Ltd v. Union of India & The Commissioner CGST, Mumbai West Court: High Court of Bombay Date: 17 April 2026 Outcome: Petitions dismissed; case referred to Larger Bench for consideration of substantial legal questions. --- Key Issue Whether the GST Department can issue a single consolidated show-cause notice under Sections 73/74 of the CGST Act covering multiple financial years, or whether separate notices must be issued for each financial year. --- Court's Decision The Division Bench (Judges Kulkarni & Sathe) found that: 1. Consolidated notices are permissible – The operation of Section 73(1)/74(1) is not controlled by the limitation period in Section 73(10)/74(10), which governs only the issuance of final orders, not show-cause notices. 2. Each year remains separately time-barred – The consolidated notice does not extend limitation periods; each financial year remains subject to its own 3-year (Section 73) or 5-year (Section 74) limit for issuing orders. 3. Larger Bench referral – Due to conflicting High Court decisions (Bombay's *Milroc* holding against consolidated notices vs. Delhi's *Mathur Polymers* holding in favor, recently upheld by Supreme Court dismissal), the matter is referred to a Larger Bench to settle the law. --- Status All interim orders continued pending Larger Bench decision. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts