Full Text
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: 21st November, 2025
M/S GLOBUS AGROFOODS PVT. LTD ......Petitioner
Through: Mr. Ashvini Kumar and Mr. Ankit Kumar, Advs
Through: Ms. Urvi Mohan, Adv.
JUDGMENT
27 AND + W.P.(C) 17692/2025, CM APPL. 73112/2025 M/S GLOBUS AGROFOODS PVT. LTD......Petitioner Through: Mr. Ashvini Kumar and Mr. Ankit Kumar, Advs.
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA & ORS.....Respondents Through: Ms. Urvi Mohan, Adv. CORAM: JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH JUSTICE SHAIL JAIN
JUDGMENT
Prathiba M. Singh, J.
1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode. CM APPL. 73111/2025 && CM APPL. 73113/2025 (exemption)
2. Allowed, subject to just all exceptions. Applications are accordingly disposed of. W.P.(C) 17691/2025 & W.P.(C) 17692/2025
3. The present two petitions have been filed by the Petitioner under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, assailing the following orders, Show Cause Notices (hereinafter, ‘SCNs’) and the notifications: In W.P.(C) 17691/2025 ● SCN dated 25th September, 2023 as also the consequent order dated 7th December, 2023 (hereinafter, ‘impugned order 1’) passed by the Sales Tax Officer Class II/AVATO, Ward 50, Zone 3, Delhi for the Financial Year 2017-18. Vide the impugned order 1 the following demands have been raised qua the Petitioner: • Notification No. 9/2023 – Central Tax dated 31st March, 2023; • Notification No. 9/2023 – State Tax dated 22nd June, 2023; In W.P.(C) 17692/2025 ● SCN dated 28th May, 2024 as also the consequent order dated 29th August, 2024 (hereinafter, ‘impugned order 2’) passed by the Sales Tax Officer Class II/AVATO, Ward 50, Zone 3, Delhi for the Financial Year 2019-20. Vide the impugned order 2 the following demands have been raised qua the Petitioner: • Notification No. 56/2023- Central Tax dated 28th December, 2023; and • Notification No. 56/2023- State Tax dated 11th July, 2024
4. The challenge in the present petitions are 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:
granted contrary to the mandate under Section 168A of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and ratification was given subsequent to the issuance of the notification. The notification incorrectly states that it was on the recommendation of the GST Council. Insofar as the Notification No. 56 of 2023 (State Tax) is concerned, the challenge is to the effect that the same was issued on 11th July, 2024 after the expiry of the limitation in terms of the Notification No.13 of 2022 (State Tax).
5. In fact, Notification Nos. 09 and 56 of 2023 (Central Tax) were challenged before various other High Courts. The Allahabad Court has upheld the 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:
4. We have heard Dr. S. Muralidhar, the learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner.
5. The issue that falls for the consideration of this Court is whether the time limit for adjudication of show cause notice and passing order under Section 73 of the GST Act and SGST Act (Telangana GST Act) for financial year 2019-2020 could have been extended by issuing the Notifications in question under Section 168-A of the GST Act.
6. There are many other issues also arising for consideration in this matter.
7. Dr. Muralidhar pointed out that there is a 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:
67. Since the matter is pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the interim order passed in the present cases, would continue to operate and would be governed by the final adjudication by the Supreme Court on the issues in the aforesaid SLP- 4240-2025.
68. In view of the aforesaid, all these connected cases are disposed of accordingly along with pending applications, if any.”
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. As observed by this Court in the order dated 22nd April, 2025 as well, since the challenge to the above mentioned notifications is presently under consideration before 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 challenge made by the Petitioner to the impugned notifications in the present proceedings shall also be subject to the outcome of the decision of the Supreme Court.
6. However, in cases where the challenge is to the parallel State Notifications, some of the cases 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, however, the SCNs in these matters were issued under Section 73 of the Central Goods and Service Act, 2017 (hereinafter, ‘CGST Act’) raising the abovementioned demands. The Petitioner did not reply to the SCNs nor appeared for the personal hearing and has chosen to challenge them now, quite belatedly. The impugned orders are dated 07th December. 2023 and 29th August, 2024.
8. The submission of the ld. Counsel for the Petitioner is that in these matters, the SCNs from which the impugned order arises, was uploaded on the ‘Additional Notices Tab’ due to which replies were not filed and personal hearings were also not attended. The submission on behalf of the Petitioner is that the impugned orders were passed without providing the Petitioner a personal hearing and in the absence of a reply on behalf of the Petitioner. It is submitted that only when the Statutory Audit was conducted in September, 2025, the SCNs and orders came to the knowledge of the Petitioner.
9. In W.P.(C) 17691/2025 for the financial year 2017-18, the SCN is dated 25th September, 2023 and therefore, the submission of the Petitioner that the SCN was on the ‘Additional Notices Tab’ would apply. However, in W.P.(C) 17692/2025 for the financial year 2019-20, the SCN is dated 28th May, 2024 and due to the changes brought by the Department on the GST Portal on 16th January, 2024, the submission of the Petitioner pertaining to ‘Additional Notices Tab’ would not apply.
10. Moreover, the Petitioner had earlier filed W.P.(C) 14405/2025 titled ‘M/s Globus Agrofoods Ltd. v. Sales Tax Officer, Class-II, AVATO, Ward- 50, Zone-3, Delhi, wherein no challenge was raised to the impugned notifications and the liberty was granted to the Petitioner in the following terms:
11. 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:
the access of the Notices as they were projected on the GST Portal under the tab ‘Additional Notices & Orders’. He submits that the said issue has now been addressed and the ‘Additional Notices & Orders’ tab is placed under the 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.”
12. Moreover, this Court in W.P.(C) 4779/2025 titled ‘Sugandha Enterprises through its Proprietor Devender Kumar Singh V. Commissioner Delhi Goods And Service Tax and Others’, under similar circumstances where no reply was filed to the SCN had remanded the matter in the following terms:
9. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside. The Petitioner is granted 30 days’ time to file the reply to SCN. Upon filing of the reply, the Adjudicating Authority shall issue to the Petitioner, a notice for personal hearing. The personal hearing notice shall be communicated to the Petitioner on the following mobile no. and e-mail address:....”
13. 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.
14. Accordingly, the impugned orders in the present petitions are set aside, subject to the Petitioner depositing a sum of Rs.10,000/- in each of the two petitions as costs with Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee. The bank details of the Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee are as under: ● Name: Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee ● Bank: UCO Bank, Delhi High Court. ● A/c No.: 15530110008386 ● IFSC Code: UCBA0001553
15. The Petitioner is granted time till 10th January, 2025, to file the reply to SCNs. Upon filing of the reply, the Adjudicating Authority shall issue to the Petitioner, a notice for personal hearing. The personal hearing notice shall be communicated to the Petitioner on the following mobile no. and email address: • E-mail Address: ashvini35@gmail.com • Mobile No.: +91 97212092[2]
16. 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 fresh orders with respect to the SCNs shall be passed accordingly.
17. 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. and this Court in W.P.(C) 9214/2024 titled ‘Engineers India Limited v. Union of India &Ors’.
18. These petitions are disposed of in these terms. All pending applications, if any, are also disposed of.
PRATHIBA M. SINGH JUDGE SHAIL JAIN JUDGE NOVEMBER 21, 2025/PT/Ck