Tata Play Ltd Vs Sales Tax Officer Class II/ AVATO (Delhi High Court)
Tata Play Ltd. filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging a Show Cause Notice (SCN) dated 30th November 2024 and the consequent demand order dated 28th February 2025 issued by the Sales Tax Officer, Department of Trade and Taxes, Delhi. The SCN and order pertained to the tax period April 2020 to March 2021, demanding Rs. 5,63,52,147 as tax, Rs. 4,22,64,110 as interest, and Rs. 56,35,214 as penalty on the ground of allegedly erroneous availing of excess Input Tax Credit (ITC) by Tata Play Ltd., a company providing Direct-to-Home broadcasting services and registered under the CGST Act.
The petition raised two primary issues: (i) whether the SCN was issued within the limitation period prescribed under Section 73 of the CGST Act, and (ii) whether Tata Play Ltd. was afforded adequate opportunity to file replies and participate in personal hearings.
Tata Play Ltd. contended that the SCN was issued beyond the statutory limitation. They argued that under Notification No. 40/2021 and Rule 80(1) of the CGST Rules, the due date for furnishing annual returns for FY 2020-21 was extended to 28th February 2022, making the three-year period for passing orders expire on 28th February 2025. Accordingly, the SCN should have been issued by 28th November 2024, but it was issued on 30th November 2024. The petitioner relied on decisions from the Andhra Pradesh High Court and the Supreme Court emphasizing that time limits under Section 73 are mandatory and not directory.
