Neelgiri Machinery v. Commissioner Delhi Goods and Service Tax

1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

2. The Petitioner –Neelgiri Machinery through its proprietor, Ms. Asha Devi has filed the present Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, challenging the Show Cause Notice (hereinafter, ‘SCN’) dated 11th December, 2023 as also the consequent order dated 30th April 2024 (hereinafter, ‘impugned order’) passed by the Sales Tax Officer Class II/AVATO, Ward 63, Zone-6, Delhi for the tax period April 2018 to March 2019 (hereinafter, ‘impugned order’).

3. Additionally, the present petition also challenges the vires of the following notifications: ● Notification No. 9/2023- Central Tax dated 31st March, 2023 ● Notification No. 56/2023- Central Tax dated 28th December, 2023 ● Notification No. 56/2023-State Tax dated 11th July, 2024 (hereinafter, ‘the impugned notifications’).

4. The challenge in the present petition is similar to a batch of petitions wherein, inter alia, the impugned notifications were challenged. W.P.(C) NO. 16499/2023 titled DJST Traders Private Limited v. Union of India & Ors. was the lead matter 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:

validity of Notification no.9. The Patna High Court has upheld the validity of Notification no.56. Whereas, the Guwahati High Court has quashed Notification No. 56 of 2023 (Central 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:

cleavage of opinion amongst different High Courts of the country. 8. Issue notice on the SLP as also on the prayer for interim relief, returnable on 7-3- 2025.”

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.”