Kalpataru Properties Limited, a wholly owned subsidiary of Kalpataru Limited, has received a show-cause-cum-demand notice from the GST authorities seeking ₹73,85,00,312 (₹73.85 crore), plus applicable interest and penalty. The notice concerns certain construction services supplied in financial year 2025–26. Kalpataru Properties says the demand is not legally sustainable and that it will file a reply contesting the notice.
The amount is a tax department demand at the notice stage—not a confirmed liability. The available disclosure does not establish a final adjudication, payment, accounting provision or court ruling.
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
What the GST notice says
| Item | Details |
|---|---|
| Company | Kalpataru Properties Limited |
| Parent relationship | Wholly owned subsidiary of Kalpataru Limited |
| Demand in the notice | ₹73,85,00,312 (₹73.85 crore) |
| Additional exposure cited | Applicable interest and penalty |
| Services covered | Certain construction services |
| Tax period | Financial year 2025–26 |
| Reported legal basis | Section 74A of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, read with corresponding provisions of the Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 |
A show-cause-cum-demand notice sets out the department’s proposed tax position and asks the taxpayer to explain why the proposed amount should not be recovered. It does not, by itself, prove that the entire amount will ultimately be payable.
Recommended Free Tools
When Kalpataru received and disclosed it
- 15 October 2026: The GST notice was dated.
- 16 October 2026, 3:00 p.m.: Kalpataru Properties received the notice.
- 17 October 2026: The company disclosed the event under Regulation 30 of the Securities and Exchange Board of India’s Listing Obligations and Disclosure Requirements regulations.
The disclosure date matters because listed companies are expected to report material events promptly under the prescribed regulatory framework. It records the existence and headline value of the notice, not the eventual outcome of the tax dispute.
#1 Best Overall
Why Kalpataru is contesting the demand
Kalpataru Properties has stated that the notice is not legally sustainable. The company intends to submit an appropriate reply to the GST authorities. Its public position does not concede the proposed tax, interest or penalty.
The disclosure does not set out the department’s detailed computation, the precise construction transactions in dispute, or the arguments Kalpataru will use in its reply. Those details can become clearer when the company files its response or when the authorities issue an adjudication order.
Is ₹73.85 crore a final GST liability?
No. At this stage, ₹73.85 crore is the amount demanded in a show-cause notice. A final liability would normally depend on the taxpayer’s response, the department’s adjudication and any available appeal or judicial proceedings. Interest and penalty could also change the amount if the department’s position is upheld, but their final value is not stated in the disclosure.
There is likewise no reported confirmation that Kalpataru Properties has paid the demand or recorded a provision for it in its accounts. Readers should therefore distinguish the notice amount from a settled cash outflow or an adjudicated tax expense.
What “no material financial impact” means
Kalpataru Properties’ management said: This Notice does not have any material financial impact on the operations of the Company.
That is the company’s assessment of the notice’s effect on its operations. It does not cancel the department’s claim, determine the legal merits or guarantee that no payment will ever be required.
For investors, the practical questions are whether a provision or payment appears in later financial statements, whether the company’s reply changes the amount under dispute, and whether an adjudication or appeal creates a cash or earnings impact. None of those later outcomes is established by the initial disclosure.
Rank #4
What to watch next
- Kalpataru’s written reply: This should explain why the company considers the notice unsustainable and identify the transactions and legal provisions it disputes.
- Adjudication order: The department may confirm, reduce or drop the proposed demand after considering the reply.
- Interest and penalty calculation: Any confirmed tax could carry additional amounts under the applicable GST provisions.
- Financial-statement treatment: Future filings may show whether management records a provision, makes a payment or continues to classify the matter as contingent.
- Appeal or court proceedings: If an order is issued, the company may use the statutory appellate process, subject to the applicable requirements.
Until one of these steps occurs, the most accurate description is that Kalpataru Properties is defending a ₹73.85 crore GST demand proposed for certain FY 2025–26 construction services. The notice is significant enough to require a regulatory disclosure, but its final financial and legal effect remains unresolved.
Free tools Windows power users keep installed
One-click scans. No signup required.
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
