ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation
Date: 23.12.2025
Madras High Court Declares GST Notifications Illegal
This Article has been written by Shri Ravi Shekhar Jha, Advocate based in New Delhi. The views expressed are based on his interpretation of the law. He can be reached at his email id intelconsul@gmail.comor on his Mobile +91-9999005379.
On December 17, 2025, the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court delivered a landmark judgment in favor of Tvl Voylla Fashions Private Limited, represented by its authorized signatory. The case, W.P. (MD) No. 36017 of 2025, challenged the validity of two GST notifications issued by the Union of India: Notification No. 09/2023-Central Tax dated 31.03.2023 and Notification No. 56/2023-Central Tax dated 28.12.2023. The court ruled these notifications as vitiated and illegal, marking a significant victory for the petitioner.
Background of the Case
The petitioner, Tvl Voylla Fashions Private Limited, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of certiorari to quash the impugned notifications and the consequential assessment order passed by the Assistant Commissioner (ST) (FAC) for the assessment year 2019-2020. The petitioner argued that the notifications violated several constitutional provisions, including Article 14, 246A, and 265, and were ultra vires Section 168A of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.
The petitioner contended that the notifications were issued retrospectively, curtailing the limitation period for assessment and adjudication under the CGST Act. This, they argued, was contrary to the Supreme Court’s order dated January 10, 2022, which excluded the period from March 15, 2020, to February 28, 2022, for the purpose of calculating the limitation period under Section 73 of the CGST Act.
Key Arguments and Court Observations
During the hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner and the Additional Government Pleader representing the respondents presented their arguments. The court noted that the issue raised in this case had already been addressed in a previous judgment delivered on June 12, 2025, in W.P. Nos. 17184 of 2024, where the court had categorically held that:
- The authorities under the CGST Act are entitled to exclude the period from March 15, 2020, to February 28, 2022, while calculating the limitation period under Section 73 of the CGST Act, as per the Supreme Court’s order under Article 142 of the Constitution.
- The impugned notifications were vitiated and illegal for several reasons:
- They curtailed the limitation period contrary to the Supreme Court’s order under Article 142.
- They were based on erroneous assumptions and misconceptions about the scope and effect of the Supreme Court’s order.
- They arbitrarily extinguished the vested rights of action available to authorities under the CGST Act.
- Notification No. 56/2023 was issued without the recommendations of the GST Council, violating the statutory mandate.
The court also highlighted issues such as the violation of principles of natural justice, lack of jurisdiction, and errors apparent on the face of the record.
The Court’s Decision
After considering the submissions and referring to the earlier judgment, the Honorable Justice ruled in favor of the petitioner. The court declared the impugned notifications as vitiated and illegal and set aside the consequential assessment order dated August 28, 2024. The court directed the authorities to treat the impugned order as a show cause notice and allowed the petitioner to submit objections within 8 weeks. The authorities were instructed to pass fresh orders after providing the petitioner an opportunity for a hearing.
Implications of the Judgment
This judgment is a significant victory for taxpayers and businesses, as it reinforces the importance of adhering to constitutional principles and statutory mandates while issuing notifications under the GST framework. The court’s decision highlights the following key points:
- Protection of Vested Rights: The judgment ensures that taxpayers’ rights are not arbitrarily curtailed by retrospective notifications that diminish the limitation period for assessment and adjudication.
- Adherence to Supreme Court Orders: The ruling underscores the importance of complying with the Supreme Court’s directives, particularly those issued under Article 142 of the Constitution.
- Role of the GST Council: The judgment reiterates the statutory requirement for the GST Council’s recommendations before issuing notifications, ensuring transparency and accountability in the decision-making process.
Conclusion
The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court has once again demonstrated its commitment to upholding the rule of law and protecting the rights of taxpayers. The victory of Tvl Voylla Fashions Private Limited serves as a reminder to authorities to exercise their powers within the bounds of the law and constitutional principles. This case sets a precedent for future challenges to arbitrary and retrospective notifications, ensuring a fair and just taxation system for all stakeholders.
Listen to this on our #YouTube Channel
Source: Madras High Court
Handy Download:
Write to us at office@aadrikaalaw.com
Tel: +91-11-4999 2707 I +91-9999005379
