Full Text
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: 16th May, 2025
M/S MASCON .....Petitioner
Through: Mr Vijay Gupta, Mr Rahul Gupta and Ms Kajol Soni, Advocates.
Through: Ms. Vaishali Gupta, Panel Counsel (Civil) GNCTD.
Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)
JUDGMENT
1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode. CM APPL. 29734/2025 (for exemption)
2. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Application is disposed of.
3. The present petition has been filed by Petitioner – M/s Mascon under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, assailing the Show Cause Notice dated 29th May 2024 as also the consequent order dated 7th August 2024 passed by Sales Tax Officer Class II /AVATO, Ward 56, Zone 4, Delhi.
4. The petition also challenges the vires of Notification No. 56/2023- Central Tax dated 28th December, 2023 as also the Notification NO. 56/2023-State Tax dated 11th July, 2024 (hereinafter ‘impugned notifications’).
5. 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:
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.”
6. 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 in S.L.P. NO. 4240/2025 titled M/s HCC-SEW-MEIL-AAG JV v. Assistant Commissioner of State Tax & Ors.
7. 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.
8. On facts, however, the Show Cause Notice was issued to the Petitioner on 29th May 2024 by Sales Tax Officer Class II / AVATO, Ward 56, Zone 4, Delhi. Thereafter, two reminder notices were issued to the Petitioner on 9th July 2024 and 20th July 2024 respectively. However, no reply was filed by the Petitioner to the Show Cause Notice leading to passing of the impugned order dated 7th August 2024. The Petitioner is also stated to have filed a rectification application on 21st March, 2025 which was rejected on 2nd April, 2025.
9. Under such circumstances, considering the fact that the Petitioner did not get a proper opportunity to be heard and no reply to the Show Cause Notice has been filed by the Petitioner, the matter deserves to be remanded back to the concerned Adjudicating Authority.
10. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside. The Petitioner is granted time till 10th July 2025, to file the reply to Show Cause Notice. 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 ID: rahulgupta219a@gmail.com Mobile No.: 9711953429
11. The reply filed by the Petitioner to the Show Cause Notice along with the submissions made in the personal hearing proceedings shall be duly considered by the Adjudicating Authority and fresh order with respect to the Show Cause Notice shall be passed accordingly.
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. and this Court in W.P.(C) 9214/2024 titled Engineers India Limited v. Union of India &Ors.
13. All rights and remedies of the parties are left open. Access to the GST Portal, shall be provided to the Petitioner to enable uploading of the reply as also access to the notices and related documents.
14. The present writ petition is disposed of in above terms. All the pending applications, if any, are also disposed of.
PRATHIBA M. SINGH JUDGE RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTA JUDGE MAY 16, 2025/da/ck