Is my GST notice time-barred? The section 73, 74 and 74A calculator

Count from the due date of the annual return for the year in dispute. Under section 73 the order must issue within three years of that date and the notice at least three months before the order's deadline; under section 74, the order within five years and the notice at least six months before that; under section 74A, for FY 2024-25 onwards, the notice within 42 months and the order within 12 months of the notice. For FY 2022-23 under section 73, that puts the last date for the notice at 30 September 2026 and the order at 31 December 2026 (10 October 2026 and 10 January 2027 in nine Tamil Nadu districts, whose return was due on 10 January 2024).

The rules, in the Act's words

CGST Act on the CBIC tax information portal, consolidated as at 1 April 2026. For an erroneous refund, each period runs from the date of the refund instead. Rule 80(1) sets the annual return's due date: "the thirty-first day of December following the end of such financial year".

The calculator

Pick the financial year. From FY 2021-22 it uses the rule 80 due date; for FY 2017-18 to FY 2020-21 it uses the extended due dates and adds the Supreme Court's COVID exclusion as a second reading (see older years). It runs in your browser and sends nothing anywhere.

Due dates that differ. FY 2017-18 returns were due on 5 February 2020 for Chandigarh, Delhi, Gujarat, Haryana, Jammu and Kashmir, Ladakh, Punjab, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand, and on 7 February 2020 elsewhere (Notification 06/2020-CT). FY 2022-23 returns were due on 10 January 2024 for persons whose principal place of business is in Chennai, Tiruvallur, Chengalpattu, Kancheepuram, Tirunelveli, Tenkasi, Kanyakumari, Thoothukudi or Virudhunagar (rule 80(1B), inserted by Notification 02/2024-CT), and on 31 December 2023 elsewhere.

How dates are counted. A notice is in time if its date plus three (or six) calendar months falls on or before the order deadline. Where the deadline is the last day of a short month, courts differ (see the three months), so the later count is shown with the stricter date beside it. The date used is that of the show cause notice in FORM GST DRC-01, the notice under section 73(1); a DRC-01A pre-notice intimation is a separate step (Madhya Pradesh High Court, WP 40186/2026, paras 4 and 10). Persons with turnover up to ₹2 crore were exempted from filing the annual return for FY 2020-21 to FY 2023-24 (Notifications 31/2021, 10/2022, 32/2023 and 14/2024-CT) and for FY 2024-25 onwards (15/2025-CT of 17 September 2025). For them the "due date for furnishing of annual return" is arguable; we found no case law, and the calculator uses the rule 80 dates.

Year by year

Rule 80 due dates (rule 80(1B) for the Tamil Nadu row). Excludes any stay (s.75(1)) and any period under s.75(11). "Notice by" leaves the minimum lead time before the order's deadline.

The extension needs the Commissioner, or an authorised officer not below Joint Commissioner, to record reasons in writing before the 12 months run out (s.74A(7), proviso).

Due dates: Notifications 06/2020-CT (FY 2017-18), 80/2020-CT (FY 2018-19), 04/2021-CT (FY 2019-20); rule 80(1A) (FY 2020-21). "As notified": the section 73(10) dates of Notifications 9/2023-CT and 56/2023-CT, else three years; we found no notification extending section 74. Square brackets: the stricter notice date. COVID columns: the months of the Supreme Court's exclusion inside the period, added to its end as in G.R. Infra para 8; a Court holding for section 73 only, so the section 74 column is our extension. FY 2017-18 is not worked: a section 74 extension would have run only to about late January 2027, so its notice date (about late July 2026) has also passed.

Where each year stands on 1 November 2026

• FY 2017-18 to FY 2020-21: the last date for a fresh notice has passed on every reading above. The latest, 31 August 2026, is the section 74 date for FY 2020-21, and for FY 2018-19 and FY 2019-20 only on our section 74 extension.
• FY 2021-22: section 73 is closed; a section 74 notice can issue until 30 June 2027.
• FY 2022-23: the section 73 notice date passed on 30 September 2026 (10 October in the nine Tamil Nadu districts); an order on a notice already issued is due by 31 December 2026 (10 January 2027). Section 74 notice until 30 June 2028 (10 July).
• FY 2023-24: section 73 notice by 30 September 2027; section 74 notice by 30 June 2029.
• FY 2024-25 and FY 2025-26 (section 74A): notice by 30 June 2029 and 30 June 2030. We found no notification extending the FY 2024-25 return date; if there was one, the extended date governs.

Worked examples

What the Supreme Court said on 19 August 2026

In M/s G.R. Infra Projects Limited v. State of Madhya Pradesh (Civil Appeal No. 11277 of 2026, J.B. Pardiwala and K. Vinod Chandran, JJ.), the Supreme Court set aside a section 74 notice for FY 2018-19. The signed order is on the Supreme Court's website. Every quotation below is from that order, read on 1 November 2026.

"The SCN issued in this case on 13.06.2025 for the assessment year 2018-2019 definitely hit by limitation under Section 73."

Supreme Court of India, Civil Appeal No. 11277 of 2026, order of 19 August 2026, para 8 · signed order (sci.gov.in)

Why section 74 did not save it. The Court refused to look at the State's counter affidavit: a notice's requirements "should be contained in such notice or order and cannot be supplanted by a counter affidavit in Court" (para 5). On the notice itself:

"What is required for the extended time to be applied are the allegations, which lead to the inference of a fraud or the concealment as attempted by the assessee resulting in suppression of facts, should emanate from the notice itself. It cannot be a mechanical use of the words 'fraud, willful misstatement or suppression of facts' without listing out the aspects which persuades the assessing officer to conclude that there has been employed either of these surreptitious devices by the assessee."

Supreme Court of India, Civil Appeal No. 11277 of 2026, 19 August 2026, para 10

So the notice itself has to carry the facts that show intent; a "bland statement", in the Court's words, is not enough.

A High Court has already applied it. On 14 October 2026 the Madhya Pradesh High Court, on a petition by the same company against a new section 74 notice, reproduced paras 9 to 11 of the order (para 7) and quashed the notice, leaving the department free to issue a fresh one in accordance with law (para 12). It added (para 10):

"Section 73 prescribes the limitation of 3 years, whereas Section 74 prescribes the limitation of 5 years, therefore, only for the purpose of bringing the case within limitation the show-cause notice DRC-01 cannot be issued under Section 74 of the Act, if no grounds are disclosed in the show-cause notice."

High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Indore, WP 40186/2026, 14 October 2026, para 10 · order (mphc.gov.in)

Older years: extended dates, the COVID exclusion, and a split

For FY 2017-18 to FY 2019-20 the government extended the section 73 order deadlines under section 168A: Notification 13/2022-CT (FY 2017-18, to 30 September 2023), 9/2023-CT (to 31 December 2023, 31 March 2024 and 30 June 2024 for FY 2017-18, 2018-19 and 2019-20) and, last, 56/2023-CT of 28 December 2023, which moved FY 2018-19 "up to the 30th day of April, 2024" and FY 2019-20 "up to the 31st day of August, 2024". All three name section 73(10) only. Notification 13/2022-CT also excluded 1 March 2020 to 28 February 2022 in computing the section 73(10) period for recovery of an erroneous refund; that is the only exclusion the notifications themselves made. We found no later notification, none for FY 2020-21 and none for section 74; CBIC's own list is the place to look for anything newer.

On top sits the Supreme Court's own exclusion of 15 March 2020 to 28 February 2022. G.R. Infra added the part inside the three years for FY 2018-19 and treated the result, 28 February 2025, as the limit for the notice itself (paras 7 and 8). The Madras High Court's table (Tata Play Limited v. Union of India, WP 17184/2024, 12 June 2025, para 9.69) reaches 28 February 2025 for FY 2019-20 as well. The calculator shows this as a second reading; its 30 November 2024 notice date applies the section 73(2) gap to the adjusted order date, which is our derivation, and the Court's own count is flagged separately.

Whether the notified dates are valid is split:

• Allahabad, Patna and Guwahati, as the Delhi High Court records (order of 22 April 2025 in DJST Traders, quoted in Procter and Gamble Home Products v. GST Council, W.P.(C) 6169/2024, 5 May 2025, para 6): "The Allahabad Court has upheld the validity of Notification no.9. The Patna High Court has upheld the validity of Notification no.56. Whereas, the Guwahati High Court has quashed Notification No. 56 of 2023 (Central Tax)."
• Gauhati. In the batch led by Barkataki Print and Media Services, orders were set aside "on the basis of declaring that the notification No.56/2023-CT is ultra vires the provisions of Section 168A of the Central Act" (Nitai Kangsa Banik v. Union of India, WP(C) 3877/2024, 18 September 2024, para 55).
• Madras. "Notification Nos.9 and 56 of 2023 stands vitiated and illegal", the authorities getting the Supreme Court's exclusion instead (Tata Play, Madras, para 10).
• Kerala. On Notifications 13/2022 and 9/2023: "I do not find that the notifications impugned in the writ petition in Exts.P7 and P8 are ultra vires the provisions of Section 168A of the CGST/SGST Act" (Faizal Traders v. Deputy Commissioner, WP(C) 24810/2023, 7 February 2024, para 8).
• Supreme Court. It issued notice on 21 February 2025 in SLP No. 4240/2025 (HCC-SEW-MEIL-AAG JV v. Assistant Commissioner of State Tax); counsel pointed to "a cleavage of opinion amongst different High Courts" (as the Delhi order records). We found no decision.

The Gauhati, Madras and Kerala decisions are by single judges. Which of them binds depends on the State's High Court.

The three months in section 73(2): two disputes

How to count them. For FY 2020-21 the order deadline was 28 February 2025. The Andhra Pradesh High Court (Division Bench) held a notice of 30 November 2024 out of time: "The three months period which would elapse from this date would be 28.11.2024" (Cotton Corporation of India, WP 1463/2025, 5 February 2025, para 10). On identical dates the Delhi High Court (Division Bench) disagreed and held the 30 November notice in time, counting December, January and February as three calendar months (Tata Play Ltd v. Sales Tax Officer, W.P.(C) 4781/2025, 29 July 2025, paras 32 to 36). The Gauhati High Court also declined to follow Andhra Pradesh: "any show cause notice issued either on 30.11.2024 or on any date prior to 30.11.2024 would satisfy the time-line prescribed under Section 73" (Surya Business, WP(C) 6666/2024, 11 February 2026, paras 31 and 33; a Gauhati Division Bench upheld that judgment on 14 September 2026, WA 64/2026).

Whether the gap is mandatory. Several High Courts say so. Delhi (Division Bench, C.H. Robinson Worldwide Freight India v. Additional Commissioner, W.P.(C) 15508/2024, 29 October 2025, para 10): "The three month's period prescribed in Section 73(2) of the CGST Act is mandatory when read with Section 73(10) of the CGST Act." Andhra Pradesh held the same of the section 73(2) period (Cotton Corporation, para 14). The Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench, went further (A.M. Marketplaces v. Union of India, WP 7943/2025, 17 January 2026, para 5): "it is mandatory to keep gap of three months between issuance of notice and passing final order under sub-section (2) read with sub-section (10) of Section 73 of the CGST Act". It rejected the argument that the gap matters only for notices issued close to the deadline (paras 3 to 5) and quashed a notice of 18 November 2024 and an order of 31 January 2025, a gap of "about two months 13 days" (para 6). In some courts, then, an order passed within three months of the notice is vulnerable even before the deadline; the calculator flags that when both dates are entered.

What can stop the clock

• A stay. Where a court or the Appellate Tribunal stays the notice or the order, "the period of such stay shall be excluded" (s.75(1)).
• A pending appeal on the same issue. Where the department appeals a decision against it in other proceedings, the time between the decisions is excluded for notices on that issue (s.75(11)).
• An order after directions. Where an appellate authority or court directs a fresh order, it must issue within two years of the direction being communicated (s.75(3)).

Frequently asked questions

Limits. Nira does not yet hold the Supreme Court's G.R. Infra order, which is read here from the signed order, and its text of rule 80 (as at 1 February 2026) lacks sub-rule (1B), inserted by Notification 02/2024-CT, so the Tamil Nadu dates are read from the notification.

Sources

• Statute CGST Act s.73, s.74, s.74A, s.75, s.168A; CGST Rules rule 80; Notification 02/2024-CT (rule 80(1B)). CBIC tax information portal, read 1 November 2026.
• Supreme Court G.R. Infra Projects Ltd v. State of Madhya Pradesh, CA 11277/2026, 19 August 2026, paras 5, 7, 8, 10: signed order, sci.gov.in.
• High Courts Madhya Pradesh, WP 40186/2026, 14 October 2026 (order, mphc.gov.in). The other decisions are cited where quoted; all are held in Nira.