Limitation for GST demands: the year by year table you should keep in every file
Most demands are argued on merits and decided on dates. Build the table first.
For years up to 2023-24, Section 73 requires the notice within thirty three months and the order within thirty six months of the due date for the annual return, and Section 74 requires the notice within fifty four months and the order within sixty months. For 2024-25 onwards Section 74A prescribes a single scheme of forty two months for the notice and twelve months for the order, extendable by six. Notifications under Section 168A extended the Section 73 dates for 2017-18, 2018-19 and 2019-20, and those extensions are under challenge.
The columns your table must have
The financial year. The due date for furnishing the annual return for that year, as extended by any notification for that year.
The ordinary outer date for the notice and for the order, under Section 73 or Section 74 as invoked, or Section 74A for later years.
Every extension notification relied on by the department, by number and date, and the extended date it produces.
The actual date of the notice and the actual date of the order, with the date of service of each.
Any period excluded, with the provision relied on and the document that establishes the exclusion.
Where the errors are
The annual return due date. It was extended for several early years, and the extension moves every subsequent date. Departments and taxpayers both use the wrong base date.
The wrong notification. Extensions were year specific. A notification applicable to 2018-19 does not extend 2019-20, and orders frequently cite the wrong one.
Service. Limitation for the notice runs to issue, but the taxpayer's rights depend on service. Where a notice was uploaded but not communicated, both points must be taken.
Bunching. A single notice covering several years obscures the year wise position. Insist on the year wise table in the reply, and object to the bunching itself.
How to use the table
In the reply, as the first preliminary objection, with the arithmetic set out so that the officer must engage with it.
In the appeal, as a separate ground, because a limitation point not taken below is often refused above.
In deciding whether to litigate at all. A demand that is time barred on its own dates is worth contesting even where the merits are weak.
In deciding between a writ and an appeal, because limitation is a pure question of law and does not require the record.
Exhibit — The template to keep at the front of every demand file
| Field | Where it comes from | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|
| Annual return due date for the year | Section 44 and the extension notification for that year | Every other date is computed from it |
| Ordinary notice date | Section 73(2), 74(2) or 74A | Fixes whether an extension is needed at all |
| Ordinary order date | Section 73(10), 74(10) or 74A | An order beyond it is without authority unless extended |
| Extension notifications relied on | The order itself; ask if not cited | Year specific; the wrong notification is a complete answer |
| Actual notice and order dates | DRC-01 and DRC-07 | The comparison that decides the point |
| Excluded periods | Section 75(11) and any stay order | The department must establish the exclusion, not assume it |
Keep this table updated as the Section 168A litigation develops; the extended dates for 2017-18 to 2019-20 are not settled.
What to do on Monday
Build the table for every open year now, not when the notice arrives.
Verify each extension notification by number, date and year before accepting the department's date.
Plead limitation as the first preliminary objection and again as a separate appeal ground.
Where the order is beyond the ordinary date and rests only on an extension under challenge, evaluate a writ on limitation alone.
This page states the general position. A reader with a specific question on their own facts may write to the GST practice at AMLEGALS.
Write to the GST practiceQuestions we are asked on this
Does limitation run from the end of the year or from the annual return due date?
From the due date for furnishing the annual return for that financial year, which is why the extensions to that due date matter.
If the notice is in time but the order is late, what happens?
The order is without authority. The limitation for the order is separate and is frequently the stronger point.
Can a time barred demand be saved by calling it Section 74?
Only if the ingredients are pleaded and proved. Invoking Section 74 to gain limitation, without the ingredient, is the most commonly litigated overreach for pre 2024-25 years.
Do the Section 168A extensions apply to Section 74 demands?
Check the notification; the extensions were framed with reference to specific provisions and years. Do not assume they cover a Section 74 order.
Does an appeal extend limitation for a fresh notice?
No. Section 75(11) and the specific exclusion provisions must be identified; a general assertion of exclusion is not enough.
In this cluster
- GST show cause notice: how to read it, and how to answer it
- Section 73 versus Section 74: where the department overreaches, and how to prove it
- Section 74A: the unified limitation regime from FY 2024-25
- DRC-01A pre notice intimation: reply, pay, or wait?
- From DRC-01 to DRC-07: the adjudication chain in one page
- Vague and omnibus notices: how Amrit Foods, Brindavan Beverages and Oryx Fisheries decide GST demands
- Suppression of facts under Section 74: what the department must actually prove
- Personal hearing under Section 75(4): the right, and the consequence of denying it
- Orders that travel beyond the notice: Section 75(7) in practice
- Section 168A extensions: the challenge to extended limitation, and where the litigation stands
GST Insights is published by AMLEGALS for general information. Law stated as on 3 September 2026. Not advice on any particular set of facts; not an advertisement or a solicitation under Rule 36 of the Bar Council of India Rules. Readers with a question on their own facts may write to the GST practice of their own accord.