Summary
- The Supreme Court has ruled that vague allegations of “fraud” or “suppression of facts” in a GST show cause notice are insufficient to invoke the extended limitation period under Section 74 of the CGST Act.
- In the case of M/s G.R. Infra Projects Limited Ratlam, the Court set aside a notice demanding Rs. 1,52,56,431 issued after the ordinary limitation period had expired.
- The Court emphasized that specific facts and reasoning must be included in the notice itself to justify claims of fraud or suppression; later explanations cannot validate a deficient notice.
- This ruling serves as a critical precedent for practitioners navigating GST assessments where Section 74 is invoked without adequate justification.
Join the discussion — sign up to comment, upvote, and save articles.