Case Law Details
EVM Motors And Vehicles India Private Limited Vs Assistant Director (Kerala High Court)
The petitioner challenged Ext.P1, a composite Show Cause Notice issued by the respondents covering multiple financial years, namely 2021-22, 2022-23, and 2023-24.
The principal contention of the petitioner was that a single composite notice covering multiple assessment years was legally unsustainable. Reliance was placed on the decisions of the Kerala High Court in Joint Commissioner (Intelligence & Enforcement) v. M/s. Lakshmi Mobiles Accessories [2025 KHC OnLine 149] and Tharayil Medicals (M/s.), Thrissur v. Deputy Commissioner, Thrissur [2025 KHC OnLine 467], wherein the Court had held that issuance of a composite notice for multiple assessment years was not legally permissible.
After hearing both sides, the Kerala High Court found merit in the petitioner’s contention. The Court noted that the Division Bench, in the decisions relied upon by the petitioner, had already entered a finding that composite notices covering multiple assessment years were not legally sustainable.
In view of the principles laid down in the earlier judgments, the Court held that interference with the impugned notice was warranted. Accordingly, Ext.P1 composite Show Cause Notice was quashed.
At the same time, the Court granted liberty to the respondents to issue separate notices for the relevant assessment years in accordance with law. The Court further directed that the period from the date of issuance of Ext.P1 until the date of receipt of the certified copy of the judgment would be excluded while computing the limitation period for initiating fresh proceedings.
The writ petition was disposed of on these terms, with all other contentions of the parties left open for consideration in any fresh proceedings that may be initiated.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF KERALA HIGH COURT
This writ petition is submitted by the petitioner challenging Ext.P1 composite Show Cause Notice which was issued by the respondents for multiple financial years namely, 2021-2022 to 2023-2024. The main challenge raised against the sustainability of the same is that, issuance of a composite notice for multiple assessment years was found to be not legally sustainable as per the decision rendered by this Court in Joint Commissioner (Intelligence & Enforcement) v. M/s. Lakshmi Mobiles Accessories [2025 KHC OnLine 149] and Tharayil Medicals (M/s.), Thrissur v. Deputy Commissioner, Thrissur [2025 KHC OnLine 467].
2. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents, I find merits in the said submission, in view of the fact that, such a finding was indeed entered into by the Division Bench of this Court in the decisions referred to above.
In such circumstances, in the light of the principles laid down by this Court in the above referred judgments, an interference is required. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of, quashing Ext.P1, granting liberty to the respondent to issue separate notices for the relevant assessment years. However, the period from the date of Ext.P1 till the date of receipt of certified copy of the judgment shall be excluded while computing the period of limitation for initiating fresh proceeding. All the other contentions of the parties are left open.
Author Bio
