Joint Commissioner (Intelligence And Enforcement) & Anr. Vs Lakshmi Mobile Accessories (Supreme Court of India)
The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Joint Commissioner (Intelligence and Enforcement) & Anr. v. M/s Lakshmi Mobile Accessories [SLP (Civil) Diary No. 60097 of 2025 dated January 28, 2026] issued notice in the Special Leave Petition filed by the Revenue, thereby agreeing to examine the vexed question as to “whether a consolidated show cause notice (“SCN”) and adjudication order covering multiple financial years can be issued under Section 74 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (“the CGST Act”)”. The challenge before the Hon’ble Supreme Court emanates from the judgment of the Hon’ble Kerala High Court (Division Bench) in Joint Commissioner (Intelligence & Enforcement) Vs Lakshmi Mobiles Accessories [W.A. No. 258 of 2025 dated February 05, 2025], wherein it was held that issuance of a consolidated SCN covering multiple financial years is impermissible under the scheme of Section 74 of the CGST Act and that the Department is required to pass separate adjudication orders for each financial year.
Facts:
- M/s Lakshmi Mobile Accessories (“the Respondent”/ “the Assessee”) was served a consolidated SCN under Section 74 of the CGST Act demanding differential tax, interest and penalty on the allegation of suppression of turnover for the financial years 2017-18 to 2023-24 (i.e. six financial years clubbed in a single notice).
- The Assessee challenged the consolidated SCN before the Hon’ble Kerala High Court contending that clubbing of six financial years in a solitary SCN curtailed its statutory right of defence, as the limitation available for adjudication would stand effectively circumscribed by the limitation period applicable to the earliest financial year (i.e. FY 2017-18) which was nearing expiry.
- The learned Single Judge of the Hon’ble Kerala High Court accepted the Assessee’s contention and directed the Department to pass separate adjudication orders for each financial year, while permitting passing of order for FY 2017-18 within its prescribed limitation under Section 74(10) of the CGST Act.
- Aggrieved, the Revenue preferred a writ appeal before the Division Bench contending that the CGST Act does not envisage issuance of separate notices and orders for each financial year.
- The Hon’ble Division Bench of the Kerala High Court dismissed the Revenue’s writ appeal and affirmed the directions of the learned Single Judge.
- Aggrieved by the said dismissal, the Revenue preferred the present Special Leave Petition before the Hon’ble Supreme Court.
Issue:
