Ekta Enterprises Vs State of Himachal Pradesh & anr. (Himachal Pradesh High Court)
The Himachal Pradesh High Court considered a petition challenging a composite intimation of tax liability in Form DRC-01A under Section 74(5) of the CGST Act, 2017, and a subsequent show cause notice in Form DRC-01 under Section 74(1), covering financial years 2017-18 to 2023-24.
The petitioner contended that under Section 2(106) of the CGST Act, “tax period” means the period for which the return is required to be furnished. Since returns are filed yearly, the petitioner argued that demands for multiple financial years could not be clubbed in composite DRC-01A or DRC-01 proceedings. It was further submitted that the reply filed to the DRC-01A intimation had not been considered before issuance of the DRC-01 notice.
The learned Advocate General submitted that there was no bar on issuing a composite notice covering different financial years where the issues and subject matter were the same. However, the petitioner maintained that even on this proposition, composite proceedings were not maintainable in the present case because the subject matters for the different financial years were different. Reliance was placed on the judgments dated 09.10.2025 in Commissioner Trade and Tax, Delhi vs. M/s Shanti Kiran India (P) Ltd. and M/s Milroc Good Earth Developers vs. Union of India & ors..
