Shyam Steel Vs Union of India And 5 Ors (Gauhati High Court)
Gauhati High Court held that notification no.56/2023-CE dated 28.12.2023 is not in consonance with the provisions of 168(A) of the Central GST Act, 2017. Hence, all consequential actions so taken on the basis of such notification would also fail.
Facts- Petitioners have assailed the action on the part of the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs in issuance of a notification bearing No. 56/2023 dated 28.12.2023. The challenge to the said notification are for two fold. First, the said notification so issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs is ultra vires Section 168A of the CGST Act, 2017 on the ground that there is no recommendation of the GST Council which is the mandatory requirement for the purpose of issuance of the said notification. Referring to the various provisions of the GST Act as well as the 49th Meeting of the GST Council, the learned counsel submitted that the GST Council had made a recommendation thereby extending the time limit for passing of the order under Sub-Section (9) of Section 73 of the CGST Act, 2017 for the Financial Year 2017-2018 up to 31.12.2023; for the Financial Year 20182019 up to 31.03.2024 and for the Financial Year 2019-2020 up to 30.06.2024.
