Facts of the Case

The petitioner, M/s Perfect Industries, challenged an order dated 30.12.2023 and the underlying show cause notice dated 28.09.2023 for the tax period July 2017 to March 2018, passed by the Sales Tax Officer, Delhi, under the CGST/DGST Act, 2017. The petition also challenged the vires of Notifications No.09/2023 and No.56/2023 (Central and State Tax) issued under Section 168A extending limitation for adjudication — a challenge already pending before the Supreme Court in SLP No.4240/2025 (M/s HCC-SEW-MEIL-AAG JV) amid conflicting High Court rulings. On facts, both the SCN and the order were uploaded only on the portal's "Additional Notices Tab," of which the petitioner had no knowledge, resulting in no reply being filed and an ex-parte order.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether the vires of Notifications issued under Section 168A extending the limitation period should be decided by the High Court while the identical question is pending before the Supreme Court.
  2. Whether an SCN and order visible only under the portal's "Additional Notices Tab" denied the petitioner effective notice and opportunity to be heard.
  3. What consequential relief follows for the assessee pending the Supreme Court's ruling on the notifications.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • The impugned SCN and order were uploaded under the "Additional Notices Tab" rather than the primary notices tab, and neither came to the petitioner's actual knowledge, preventing any reply or participation in the personal hearing.
  • The demand and the underlying notifications extending limitation under Section 168A were without legal basis, a challenge already engaging multiple High Courts and the Supreme Court.

Respondent's Arguments

  • Counsel for GNCTD did not dispute that the notices were placed under the "Additional Notices Tab," consistent with the Court's own findings in comparable batch matters such as Neelgiri Machinery and Satish Chand Mittal.
  • The Department's broader position on the validity of the Section 168A notifications rested on the pending Supreme Court proceedings and divergent High Court rulings referenced in the order.

Court Order / Findings

  • Noting that the vires challenge to the Section 168A notifications is sub judice before the Supreme Court, with High Courts across the country divided, the Court declined to rule on it and left the question open, to abide by the Supreme Court's eventual decision.
  • On facts, since the SCN dated 28.09.2023 predated the portal fix of 16.01.2024 that made the "Additional Notices Tab" clearly visible, and the petitioner did not get proper opportunity of hearing, the Court set aside the impugned order and granted the petitioner time to file a reply, directing that fresh personal hearing be granted and the SCN be re-adjudicated on merits, with GST portal access restored within one week.
  • All rights and remedies of both parties, including the notification-vires question, were left open pending the Supreme Court's ruling.

Important Clarification

  • Where a GST show cause notice or order predating the January 2024 portal fix was displayed only under the "Additional Notices Tab" and not brought to the assessee's actual knowledge, courts routinely set aside the resultant ex-parte order and grant a fresh opportunity to reply and be heard, without deciding the separate and pending challenge to Section 168A limitation-extension notifications.
  • The correctness of Notifications No.09/2023 and No.56/2023 under Section 168A remains an open, actively litigated question nationally, currently before the Supreme Court in SLP No.4240/2025.

Sections Involved

  • Section 168A, CGST Act, 2017 – power to extend time limits for adjudication in special circumstances, subject to GST Council recommendation.
  • Section 73, CGST Act, 2017 – underlying demand provision for the impugned SCN and order.

Decision – In Favour of

Disposed of with directions, in part in favour of the assessee — the ex-parte order was set aside for fresh adjudication with proper hearing, while the notification-vires challenge and all rights of both parties were left open.

Case Details

High Court of Delhi at New Delhi; W.P.(C) 17249/2025 & CM APPL. 71042/2025; Coram: Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Shail Jain; Date: 13.11.2025.

Link to Download the Order

Click here to view/download the full order

Disclaimer

This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.