Case Title: Synthroma Laboratories v. The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Court: Calcutta High Court (Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction, Appellate Side)
Petition No.: WPA 4149 of 2025
Category: Procedural direction on pre-show cause notice; applicability of Section 128A benefit under GST
Date of Judgment: 30 June 2025
Relevant Sections: Sections 73(1), 74(1), 128A of the CGST/WBGST Act, 2017
Facts (Paras 2–4)
The petitioner, Synthroma Laboratories, challenged a pre-show-cause notice (Form GST DRC-01A dated 19 July 2024) threatening action under Section 74 of the CGST/WBGST Act for FY 2019–21. The petitioner argued that the authorities deliberately withheld issuance of a formal notice under Section 73(1), thereby frustrating the right to avail the amnesty benefit under Section 128A (GST dispute-resolution scheme). Counsel for the petitioner sought a direction to the proper officer either to issue a statutory notice or to drop the matter.
Questions before the Court (Paras 3–5)
-
Whether the tax authority can indefinitely keep a pre-show-cause notice pending without deciding whether to issue a formal notice under Sections 73 or 74.
-
Whether such inaction defeats the taxpayer’s statutory right to seek benefit under the amnesty Scheme introduced through Section 128A.
Observations (Paras 5–7)
Justice Raja Basu Chowdhury observed that the pre-show-cause notice had remained unresolved for nearly a year. Inaction of the department risked depriving the petitioner of the time-bound amnesty benefit. The Court held that prudence demanded a clear administrative decision on the pending pre-show-cause notice based on the taxpayer’s response.
If the officer found no ground to proceed, the proceedings should be dropped. Conversely, if a formal show-cause notice under Section 73(1) or 74(1) was warranted, it must be issued “forthwith.”
Further, if such notice is issued under Section 73(1), the petitioner shall be eligible to apply for relief under Section 128A within 48 hours of the notice, subject to compliance with all formalities.
The Court clarified that this order was passed considering the peculiar facts of the case and would not serve as a precedent.
Judgment (Paras 7–10)
The writ petition was disposed of with directions:
-
The proper officer must decide the pre-show-cause notice within two working days of receipt of this order.
-
If proceedings are dropped, no further action is required.
-
If a notice under Section 73(1) is issued, the petitioner can claim the amnesty benefit under Section 128A.
-
The order was case-specific and not to be cited as precedent.
Summary of Cases Referred
| Case Name | Court & Citation | Key Verdict / Principle |
|---|---|---|
| Synthroma Laboratories v. State of West Bengal & Ors. | Calcutta HC, WPA 4149/2025 | Proper officer directed to conclude pending pre-show-cause notice within two days; if Section 73 notice is issued, petitioner eligible for Section 128A amnesty; order not precedent. |
Between Fine Lines (Trade Perspective)
This decision underscores that tax officers cannot indefinitely sit on pre-show-cause notices. Where delay risks loss of amnesty or relief under Section 128A, the taxpayer can seek judicial intervention for timely adjudication. The ruling ensures administrative accountability and timely disposal of preliminary GST communications, especially when statutory schemes are time-bound.
