Facts of the Case

The petitioner, Sight and Sound India Private Limited, filed a writ petition challenging the adjudication order dated 05.03.2024 passed by the Sales Tax Officer Class II/AVATO, SGST Ward 88, Zone-8, Delhi for the tax period April 2018 to March 2019, whereby a GST demand of ₹9,77,618 was raised. The petitioner also challenged Notification No. 09/2023 (Central Tax) dated 31.03.2023 and Notification No. 09/2023 (State Tax) dated 22.06.2023 issued under Section 168A of the CGST Act. The show cause notice dated 08.12.2023 and reminder dated 24.01.2024 were uploaded on the ‘Additional Notices’ tab of the GST portal. The petitioner contended that it had no knowledge of the SCN and therefore could not file a reply or attend the personal hearing, resulting in an ex parte adjudication order.

Issues Involved

Whether an adjudication order passed without the assessee filing a reply or being heard due to non-visibility of the SCN on the GST portal violates principles of natural justice, whether such order should be set aside and remanded, and whether the challenge to notifications issued under Section 168A of the CGST Act can be adjudicated at this stage.

Petitioner’s Arguments

The petitioner submitted that the SCN and reminder were uploaded on the ‘Additional Notices’ tab and were not visible, depriving the petitioner of an opportunity to respond or attend the personal hearing. It was argued that the adjudication order was passed in violation of principles of natural justice. The petitioner also challenged the validity of the notifications extending limitation under Section 168A of the CGST Act.

Respondent’s Arguments

The respondents contended that changes were made to the GST portal after 16.01.2024 making the ‘Additional Notices’ tab visible and that the reminder dated 24.01.2024 was issued thereafter. It was argued that despite this, the petitioner failed to file a reply or attend the personal hearing.

Court Order / Findings

The Delhi High Court observed that although changes were made to the GST portal after 16.01.2024, the original SCN dated 08.12.2023 did not appear to have come to the petitioner’s knowledge. Relying on its earlier decisions including Neelgiri Machinery, Sugandha Enterprises, Satish Chand Mittal, and Anant Wire Industries, the Court held that the intention is to ensure that adjudication orders are not passed in default without affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing. Considering the pendency of the challenge to Section 168A notifications before the Supreme Court and consistent practice of remanding such matters, the Court held that the impugned adjudication order deserved to be set aside and the matter remanded for fresh adjudication.

Important Clarification

The Court clarified that the issue concerning the validity of the notifications issued under Section 168A of the CGST Act was left open and that any fresh adjudication order would be subject to the final outcome of proceedings pending before the Supreme Court in SLP No. 4240/2025 and before the Delhi High Court in Engineers India Limited vs Union of India. The Department was directed to ensure communication of hearing notices by email in addition to portal upload.

Final Outcome

The writ petition was disposed of by setting aside the impugned adjudication order dated 05.03.2024. The petitioner was granted time till 31.01.2026 to file a reply to the show cause notice dated 08.12.2023, subject to payment of ₹10,000 as costs to the Sales Tax Bar Association. The adjudicating authority was directed to grant a personal hearing and pass a fresh reasoned order in accordance with law. Access to the GST portal was directed to be restored to the petitioner, and all rights and remedies of the parties were kept open.

Source Link- https://delhihighcourt.nic.in/app/showFileJudgment/75424122025CW196542025_175927.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.