Facts of the Case

The petitioner, Findoc Ventures Private Limited, filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution challenging the Show Cause Notice dated 21.05.2024 and the adjudication order dated 23.08.2024 passed by the Sales Tax Officer Class-II/AVATO, Ward-101, Zone-9, Delhi. The petitioner also challenged Notification No. 9/2023-Central Tax dated 31.03.2023, Notification No. 56/2023-Central Tax dated 28.12.2023, and Notification No. 56/2023-State Tax dated 11.07.2024 issued under Section 168A of the CGST Act extending limitation for adjudication.

The impugned Show Cause Notice was uploaded on the GST portal on 21.05.2024. A reminder notice was uploaded on 15.07.2024. The petitioner admittedly did not file any reply to the SCN nor attend any personal hearing. The adjudication order dated 23.08.2024 was thereafter passed ex parte. The petitioner claimed lack of knowledge of the SCN and order, stating that they came to know of the demand only when a refund application was sought to be rejected on account of the pending demand.

Issues Involved

Whether the writ petition was maintainable in light of the availability of an alternate statutory remedy under Section 107 of the CGST Act, whether the petitioner was justified in not filing a reply or attending personal hearing, whether uploading of notices on the GST portal constituted valid service, and whether the challenge to limitation-extension notifications under Section 168A could be decided by the High Court when the issue was pending before the Supreme Court.

Petitioner’s Arguments

The petitioner contended that the Show Cause Notice and adjudication order were uploaded only on the GST portal and were not communicated through any other mode, resulting in lack of knowledge. It was argued that no reply could be filed and no personal hearing attended due to absence of effective service. The petitioner sought quashing of the impugned order and SCN and also challenged the validity of the limitation-extension notifications issued under Section 168A of the CGST Act.

Respondent’s Arguments

The Revenue submitted that the Show Cause Notice, reminder notice, and adjudication order were duly uploaded on the GST portal, which constitutes valid service under GST law. It was argued that the petitioner failed to show any justification for not filing a reply or attending the personal hearing. The Department contended that the impugned order was appealable under Section 107 of the CGST Act and that the writ petition was not maintainable. It was further submitted that the challenge to the impugned notifications was pending consideration before the Supreme Court.

Court Order / Findings

The Delhi High Court noted that the challenge to Notifications issued under Section 168A of the CGST Act was already pending before the Supreme Court in SLP No. 4240/2025 and that various High Courts had taken divergent views. The Court held that the petitioner’s challenge to the impugned notifications would remain subject to the outcome of the Supreme Court proceedings.

On facts, the Court observed that the petitioner admittedly did not file any reply to the Show Cause Notice nor attend the personal hearing, despite notices and reminders being uploaded on the GST portal. The Court held that there was no justification shown for such non-compliance. In these circumstances, the Court declined to interfere with the impugned adjudication order in writ jurisdiction.

However, considering that the petitioner claimed to have acquired knowledge of the impugned order at a later stage and that the statutory period for filing appeal had expired, the Court deemed it appropriate to relegate the petitioner to the statutory appellate remedy with protection against limitation.

Important Clarification

The High Court clarified that where an assessee fails to file a reply to the Show Cause Notice or attend personal hearing without justification, writ jurisdiction would not ordinarily be exercised to quash adjudication orders. Uploading of notices on the GST portal constitutes valid service. The issue of validity of limitation-extension notifications under Section 168A was expressly left open and made subject to the final decision of the Supreme Court.

Final Outcome

The writ petition was disposed of. The petitioner was relegated to file an appeal under Section 107 of the CGST Act on or before 15.11.2025, along with the requisite pre-deposit. The appellate authority was directed not to dismiss the appeal on the ground of limitation and to adjudicate it on merits. Access to the GST portal was directed to be enabled within one week for downloading necessary documents. All proceedings and any order passed were directed to remain subject to the outcome of SLP No. 4240/2025 pending before the Supreme Court and connected matters.

Source Link- https://delhihighcourt.nic.in/app/showFileJudgment/75418092025CW144042025_192648.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.