Facts of the Case

The petitioner, M/s Davinder Chicken Centre, filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution challenging the adjudication order dated 24.08.2024 passed by the Sales Tax Officer Class II/AVATO, Ward-58, Zone-4, Delhi for the tax period April 2019 to March 2020. The impugned order raised a total demand of ₹22,37,272 comprising CGST and SGST along with interest and penalty.

The petitioner also challenged the constitutional validity of Notification No. 56/2023 (Central Tax), Notification No. 56/2023 (State Tax), Notification No. 9/2023 (Central Tax) and Notification No. 9/2023 (State Tax), all issued under Section 168A of the CGST Act extending limitation for adjudication.

A Show Cause Notice dated 23.05.2024 was issued to the petitioner, followed by a reminder dated 22.07.2024, and a personal hearing was fixed on 01.07.2024. The petitioner neither filed a reply nor appeared for the personal hearing, leading to the passing of the ex parte adjudication order.

Issues Involved

Whether the ex parte adjudication order passed without a reply or effective hearing violated principles of natural justice, whether the objection regarding uploading of notices on the “Additional Notices” tab was tenable, whether the matter deserved remand for fresh adjudication, and whether the challenge to limitation-extension notifications under Section 168A should be kept open pending decision of the Supreme Court.

Petitioner’s Arguments

The petitioner contended that the Show Cause Notice and the impugned order were uploaded on the “Additional Notices” tab of the GST portal and therefore were not effectively brought to its knowledge. It was argued that despite continuous filing of returns, the petitioner could not respond due to lack of effective notice, resulting in denial of opportunity to contest the demand on merits. The petitioner sought remand of the matter and permission to file a reply.

Respondent’s Arguments

The Revenue submitted that the Show Cause Notice was issued on 23.05.2024, followed by a reminder and fixation of personal hearing, but the petitioner failed to respond or appear. It was argued that after 16.01.2024, changes were made to the GST portal making the “Additional Notices” tab visible, and therefore the petitioner could not claim lack of knowledge. The Department relied on the pendency of challenges to the impugned notifications before the Supreme Court.

Court Order / Findings

The Delhi High Court noted that the validity of the impugned notifications issued under Section 168A of the CGST Act was pending consideration before the Supreme Court in SLP No. 4240/2025, and that various High Courts had taken divergent views. The Court reiterated that matters involving such notifications would ultimately be governed by the decision of the Supreme Court.

On facts, the Court observed that the Show Cause Notice dated 23.05.2024 and the impugned order dated 24.08.2024 were issued after 16.01.2024, when the “Additional Notices” tab had already been made visible. Therefore, the objection regarding the tab was not accepted. However, the Court also noted that no reply had been filed by the petitioner and no effective opportunity to contest the matter on merits had been availed.

Relying on its earlier decision in Sugandha Enterprises vs. Commissioner, DGST, the Court held that in such circumstances, an opportunity ought to be granted to the petitioner to file a reply and be heard on merits. Accordingly, the impugned order was set aside and the matter was remanded to the adjudicating authority.

Important Clarification

The High Court clarified that the remand was granted solely to afford an opportunity to the petitioner to contest the Show Cause Notice on merits. The issue regarding the validity of the impugned limitation-extension notifications under Section 168A was expressly left open and made subject to the final decision of the Supreme Court in SLP No. 4240/2025 and related proceedings.

Final Outcome

The writ petition was disposed of. The impugned adjudication order dated 24.08.2024 was set aside. The petitioner was granted time till 31.01.2026 to file a reply to the Show Cause Notice. Upon filing of the reply, the adjudicating authority was directed to issue a personal hearing notice to the petitioner, consider the reply and submissions, and pass a fresh reasoned order in accordance with law. All rights and remedies of the parties were kept open, subject to the outcome of pending proceedings before the Supreme Court and the Delhi High Court on the validity of the impugned notifications.

Source Link- https://delhihighcourt.nic.in/app/showFileJudgment/75418122025CW191962025_172403.pdf

Disclaimer

This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.