$~94 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010372942026 + W.P.(C) 11604/2026 and CM APPL. 53656/2026 KUSUM CABLES AND WIRES PRIVATE LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Binisa Mohanty, Adv. versus ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ADJUDICATION) CGST DELHI NORTH & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Ms. Monica Benjamin, SSC with Ms. Laiba Arif, Ms. Prerika Narang, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SHAIL JAIN O R D E R % 13.08.2026 1. At the outset, learned counsel representing the Petitioner submits that she does not wish to challenge the constitutional validity of Sections 74(2) and 74(10) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as „CGST Act‟). 2. Through the present Writ Petition, the Petitioner prays for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the Order-in- Original dated 27.01.2025 (hereinafter referred to as „Impugned Order‟) and the Show Cause Notice dated 23.07.2024 (hereinafter referred to as „Impugned SCN‟). 3. Learned counsel representing the Petitioner submits that the Impugned SCN was issued for as many as three (03) years, which, according to her, is not permissible as per the provisions of the CGST Act. 4. The aforesaid contention is no longer res integra. A Division This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 17/08/2026 at 11:49:50 Bench of this Court in W.P.(C) 4853/2025 captioned Ambika Traders Through Proprietor Gaurav Gupta v. Additional Commissioner, Adjudication DGGSTI, CGST Delhi North, 2025:DHC:6181-DB, has held that the provisions of the CGST Act contemplate issuance of a consolidated notice covering more than one financial year. The Court, inter alia, took note of the expression “for any period” and “for such periods” occurring in Sections 74(3) and 74(4) of the CGST Act, as also the definition of “tax period” under Section 2(106) of the CGST Act, and held that a notice need not necessarily be confined to a specific financial year. 5. The correctness of the Impugned Order can, in any event, be assailed before the Appellate Authority in accordance with the provisions of the CGST Act. 6. Learned counsel representing the Petitioner does not dispute the aforesaid position. She, however, submits that the while the Impugned SCN was issued in respect of a period covering three (03) financial years, the Impugned Order has been passed in respect of a period covering four (04) financial years. 7. This aspect can very well be examined by the Appellate Authority. Hence, the Petitioner, if so advised, may avail the statutory remedy of appeal. 8. With these observations, the present Petition, along with the pending application, is disposed of. ANIL KSHETARPAL, J. SHAIL JAIN, J. AUGUST 13, 2026 jai/shah This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 17/08/2026 at 11:49:50