Full Text
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: 28th May, 2025
BHARAT CONSTRUCTION AND TANK CLEANER THROUGH ITS PROPRIETOR MR. BHARAT SHARMA 2018 19.....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Parveen Gambhir, Mr. Rakesh Kumar & Mr. Akul Mangla, Advs. (M:
9810220294)
Through: Mr. Vaishali Gupta, Panel Counsel (Civil), GNCTD.
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- Bharat Construction & Tank Cleaner through its Proprietor, Mr. Bharat Sharma under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, assailing the Show Cause Notice dated 6th December, 2023 (hereinafter, ‘the SCN’) for the tax period April 2018 to March 2019, as also the consequent order dated 12th April, 2024 passed by the office of Sales Tax Officer Class II/ AVATO, Delhi (hereinafter, ‘the impugned order’).
3. The petition also challenges the vires of Notification Nos. 9/2023- Central Tax dated 31st March 2023, 56/2023- Central Tax dated 28th December, 2023 as also the Notification No. 56/2023-State Tax dated 11th July, 2024 (hereinafter ‘impugned notifications’).
4. The validity of the impugned notifications were 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:
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:
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.”
5. Thereafter, on 23rd April, 2025, this Court, having noted that the validity of the impugned notifications are 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 in S.L.P. NO. 4240/2025 titled M/s HCC-SEW-MEIL-AAG JV v. Assistant Commissioner of State Tax & Ors.
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. In the present case, the submission of the Petitioner, on facts, is that a reply was filed on 8th January, 2024, inter alia, seeking time to file the reply on merits to the SCN dated 6th December, 2023. In the SCN, a demand of Rs.17,85,040/- was raised upon the Petitioner. Thereafter, a reminder notice dated 9th March 2024 was issued to the Petitioner affording an opportunity to file the reply and attend personal hearing. However, neither the Petitioner filed the reply nor attended the personal hearing.
8. It is the case of the Petitioner that the impugned order has been passed without giving an opportunity to file a reply and without affording a personal hearing to the Petitioner. Hence, the impugned order deserves to be set aside.
9. Heard. This Court has considered the submissions made and has perused the impugned order. In the opinion of this Court, the impugned order has been passed after duly affording an opportunity to the Petitioner to file a reply and attend personal hearing.
10. Upon considering the impugned order, this Court is of the opinion that the same does not merit any interference of this Court and a challenge, if any, shall be taken up by the Petitioner before the appellate authority in appeal.
11. Accordingly, the Petitioner is granted time till 15th July, 2025, to file an appeal before the appellate authority under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017.
12. If the appeal is filed by the Petitioner before 15th July, 2025, along with the mandatory pre-deposit, the same shall be adjudicated upon merits and shall not be dismissed on the ground of limitation.
13. It is also made clear that the observations made by this Court in the present petition shall have no bearing upon the decision of the appellate authority.
14. However, it is also made clear that the issue in respect of the validity of the impugned notifications is left open. Any order passed by the appellate 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.
15. Petition is disposed of in these terms. All pending applications, if any, are also disposed of.
PRATHIBA M. SINGH JUDGE RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTA JUDGE MAY 28, 2025 dj/rks