Full Text
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: 7th May, 2025
SAURAV BEVERAGES PRIVATE LIMITED .....Petitioner
Through:
Through: Mr. Sumit K. Batra, Advocate for R/GNCTD.
Ms. Monica Benjamin, SSC
3.
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 under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, challenging two Show Cause Notices both dated 30th September, 2023 respectively (hereinafter, ‘SCNs’) and two demand orders both dated 03rd December, 2023 respectively (hereinafter, ‘impugned orders’) passed by Respondent No.5 - Sales Tax Officer Class II/AVATO, Ward 207, Zone 11, Delhi.
3. The petition also challenges the vires of Notification No. 09/2023- Central Tax dated 31st March, 2023 (hereinafter, ‘impugned notification’).
4. The validity of the impugned notification was under consideration before this Court in a batch of petitions with the lead petition 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 & 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:
8. The Court has heard ld. Counsels for the parties for a substantial period today. A perusal of the above would show that various High Courts have taken a view and the matter is squarely now pending before the Supreme Court.
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 ex-parte. 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 notification 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. On facts, the submission of the Petitioner is that the SCNs dated 30th September, 2023, from which the impugned orders arise, were uploaded on the ‘Additional Notices Tab’. Therefore, the same did not come to the knowledge of the Petitioner. The impugned order dated 03rd December, 2023 was passed without providing the Petitioner a personal hearing and in the absence of a reply on behalf of the Petitioner.
7. The Court has heard the parties. In fact, this Court in W.P.(C) 13727/2024 titled ‘Neelgiri Machinery through its Proprietor Mr. Anil Kumar V. Commissioner Delhi Goods And Service Tax And Others’, under similar circumstances where the SCN was uploaded on the ‘Additional Notices Tab’ had remanded the matter in the following terms:
general menu and adjacent to the tab ‘Notices & Orders’.
8. In view of the above, the present petition is allowed and the impugned order is set aside.
9. The respondent is granted another opportunity to reply to the impugned SCN within a period of two weeks from date. The Adjudicating Authority shall consider the same and pass such order, as it deems fit, after affording the petitioner an opportunity to be heard.
10. The present petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
11. All pending applications are also disposed of.”
7. The impugned demand orders dated 23rd April, 2024 and 5th December, 2023 are accordingly set aside. In response to show cause notices dated 04th December, 2023 and 23th September, 2023, the Petitioner shall file its replies within thirty days. The hearing notices shall now not be merely uploaded on the portal but shall also be e-mailed to the Petitioner and upon the hearing notice being received, the Petitioner would appear before the Department and make its submissions. The show cause notices shall be adjudicated in accordance with law.
8. The petitions are disposed of in the above terms. The pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.”
8. There is no doubt that after 16th January 2024, changes have been made to the GST portal and the ‘Additional Notices Tab’ has been made visible. However, in the present case, the SCNs were issued on 30th September, 2023 and the same was not brought to the notice of the Petitioner. Under such circumstances, considering the fact that the Petitioner did not get a proper opportunity to be heard and no reply to the SCNs have been filed by the Petitioner, the matter deserves to be remanded back to the concerned Adjudicating Authority.
9. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside. The Petitioner is granted time till 10th July 2025, to file the reply to SCNs. Upon filing of the reply, the Adjudicating Authority shall issue a notice for personal hearing to the Petitioner. The personal hearing notice shall be communicated to the Petitioner on the following mobile no. and e-mail address: Email Address: jitin.singhal01@gmail.com Mobile No.: 999991916[8]
10. The reply filed by the Petitioner to the SCNs, along with the submissions made in the personal hearing proceedings, shall be duly considered by the Adjudicating Authority, and a fresh comprehensive single adjudication order with respect to the SCNs shall be passed accordingly.
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. However, it is made clear that the issue in respect of the validity of the impugned notifications is left open. Any order passed by 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.
13. The petition is disposed of in these terms. All pending applications are also disposed of.
PRATHIBA M. SINGH JUDGE RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTA JUDGE MAY 7, 2025 v/ck (corrected and released on 16th May, 2025)