Full Text
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: 06th May, 2025
M/S. JINENDER PAPER MART THROUGH ITS PROPRIETOR .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Vivek Sarin, Advocate.
Through: Mr. Anurag Ojha, SSC
Mr. Gibran Naushad, SSC
Singh, Advocates for R-2.
Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)
JUDGMENT
1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.
2. The present petition has been filed by the Petitioner– M/s. Jinender Paper Mart through Its Proprietor under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India challenging order dated 27th August, 2024 passed by the Sales Tax Officer Class II/AVATO Jurisdiction, Ward 12, Zone 2, Delhi (hereinafter, ‘the impugned order’) which arises from Show Cause Notice dated 29th May, 2024
3. The petition also challenges the vires of Notification No. 9/2023- Central Tax dated 31st March, 2023 and Notification No. 56/2023- Central Tax dated 28th December, 2023 (hereinafter ‘impugned notifications’)
4. The impugned notifications were under consideration before this Court in a batch of matters with the lead matter being W.P.(C) 16499/2023 titled ‘DJST Traders Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India and Ors.’. In the said batch of petitions, on 22nd April, 2025, the parties were heard at length qua the validity of the impugned notifications and accordingly, the following order was passed:
Tax).
6. The Telangana High Court while not delving into the vires of the assailed notifications, made certain observations in respect of invalidity of Notification No. 56 of 2023 (Central Tax). This judgment of the Telangana High Court is now presently under consideration by the Supreme Court in S.L.P No 4240/2025 titled M/s HCC-SEW-MEIL-AAG JV v. Assistant Commissioner of State Tax & Ors. The Supreme Court vide order dated 21st February, 2025, passed the following order in the said case:
7. In the meantime, the challenges were also pending before the Bombay High Court and the Punjab and Haryana High Court. In the Punjab and Haryana High Court vide order dated 12th March, 2025, all the writ petitions have been disposed of in terms of the interim orders passed therein. The operative portion of the said order reads as under:
9. Apart from the challenge to the notifications itself, various counsels submit that even if the same are upheld, they would still pray for relief for the parties as the Petitioners have been unable to file replies due to several reasons and were unable to avail of personal hearings in most cases. In effect therefore in most cases the adjudication orders are passed exparte. Huge demands have been raised and even penalties have been imposed.
10. Broadly, there are six categories of cases which are pending before this Court. While the issue concerning the validity of the impugned notifications is presently under consideration before the Supreme Court, this Court is of the prima facie view that, depending upon the categories of petitions, orders can be passed affording an opportunity to the Petitioners to place their stand before the adjudicating authority. In some cases, proceedings including appellate remedies may be permitted to be pursued by the Petitioners, without delving into the question of the validity of the said notifications at this stage.
11. The said categories and proposed reliefs have been broadly put to the parties today. They may seek instructions and revert by tomorrow i.e., 23rd April, 2025.”
5. Thereafter, on 23rd April, 2025, this Court, having noted that the validity of the impugned notifications is under consideration before the Supreme Court, had disposed of several matters in the said batch of petitions after addressing other factual issues raised in the respective petitions. Additionally, while disposing of the said petitions, this Court clearly observed that the validity of the impugned notifications therein shall be subject to the outcome of the proceedings before the Supreme Court.
6. However, in cases where the challenge is to the parallel State Notifications, the same have been retained for consideration by this Court. The lead matter in the said batch is W.P.(C) 9214/2024 titled Engineers India Limited v. Union of India & Ors.
7. On facts, the submission of Mr. Vivek Sarin, ld. Counsel for the Petitioner is that the Show Cause Notice dated 29th May, 2024, was not served, and no hearing notice was also issued, as the Petitioner’s GST registration was suspended vide Show Cause Notice dated 24th July, 2023. It is his case that the Petitioner lacked any knowledge about the Show Cause Notice dated 29th May, 2024 as he did not have access to the portal at the relevant point of time. This position is disputed by the Counsel for the Respondents.
8. The Court has perused the records. The Show Cause Notice dated 24th July, 2023 reads as under: “Whereas on the basis of information which has come to my notice, it appears that your registration is liable to be cancelled for the following reasons: Rule 21(b)- person issues invoice or bill without supply of goods or services or both in violation of the provisions of the Act, or the rules made thereunder You are hereby directed to furnish a reply to the notice within seven working days from the date of service of this notice. If you fail to furnish a reply within the stipulated date or fail to appear for personal hearing on the appointed date and time, the case will be decided ex parte on the basis of available records and on merits. Please note that your registration stands suspended with effect from 24/07/2023”
9. A perusal of the above Show Cause Notice makes it clear that the Petitioner’s GST Portal remained suspended from 24th July, 2023. It is further noticed that the Petitioner has not filed a reply to the Show Cause Notice dated 29th May, 2024 from which the impugned order arises. The personal hearing, even though granted on 23rd August, 2024, has not been availed by the Petitioner. Considering the above position and the fact that the opportunity to file the reply or attend personal hearings has not been availed of, this Court is of the opinion that the Petitioner ought to be provided another opportunity to be heard on merits.
10. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is relegated to the Adjudicating Authority to be heard on merits. The Petitioner is permitted to file a reply by 10th July, 2025. Upon such reply being filed, the Adjudicating Authority shall provide a personal hearing to the Petitioner, and the notice for the same shall be sent to the following email address and Phone number: Email: kaushik.satish77@gmail.com Phone number: 9013407227
11. All the rights and remedies of the parties are left open. Access to the GST Portal, if not already available, shall be ensured to be provided to the Petitioner to enable access to the notices and related documents.
12. It is again made clear that the issue in respect of the validity of the impugned notifications is left open and the order of the Adjudicating Authority shall be subject to the outcome of the decision of the Supreme Court in S.L.P No 4240/2025 titled ‘M/s HCC-SEW-MEIL-AAG JV v. Assistant Commissioner of State Tax & Ors’ and this Court in W.P.(C) 9214/2024 titled Engineers India Limited v. Union of India & Ors.
13. The petition is disposed of in the above terms. Pending applications, if any, are also disposed of.
PRATHIBA M. SINGH (JUDGE)
RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTA (JUDGE) MAY 6, 2025/v/Ar. (corrected and released on 13th May, 2025)