Facts of the Case: M/S DK Enterprises, through its proprietor Deepak Mittal, challenged an order dated 4th February, 2025 confirming a demand arising from allegations that the firm was the main entity in a scheme involving fraudulent availment and passing on of Input Tax Credit exceeding Rs. 22.80 crore, through invoices from firms later found to be fake and non-existent. The petitioner contended that the underlying Show Cause Notice dated 24th May, 2022 had been sent by email but was never uploaded on the GST portal, and that despite following up, no personal hearing was afforded before the order was passed.

Issues Involved:

  1. Whether failure to upload the Show Cause Notice on the GST portal, though it was emailed, vitiated the proceedings on grounds of natural justice.
  2. Whether a writ petition is maintainable against a GST order confirming large-scale fraudulent ITC availment, or whether the assessee ought to be relegated to the statutory appellate remedy.

Petitioner's Arguments:

  • The Show Cause Notice was sent only by email and never uploaded on the GST portal, and hearing notices too were not uploaded due to departmental workload, depriving the petitioner of a fair opportunity to respond.
  • The proprietor had promptly replied to two other contemporaneous notices, and the sole reason for not replying to this particular notice was that it had not appeared on the portal.

Respondent's Arguments:

  • The GST Department placed on record that the Show Cause Notice was served by email on two occasions in May 2022, and that four personal hearing notices, bearing DIN numbers, were issued and dispatched by speed post in January 2025, though the Department admitted these were not uploaded on the portal at the time.
  • The impugned order recorded, in detail, statements and evidence showing that DK Enterprises had availed and passed on fraudulent ITC of over Rs. 22.80 crore through a network of fake and dummy firms, corroborated by the proprietor's own statements recorded pursuant to summons.

Court Order / Findings:

  • The Court found that the proprietor had been fully aware of the investigation throughout — having earlier sought anticipatory bail before the Punjab and Haryana High Court, appeared before the Department pursuant to that Court's order, and had his statements recorded on five separate dates — and held that there was no violation of the principles of natural justice merely because the physical reply and hearing notices were not uploaded on the portal, since the SCN itself was admittedly served by email.
  • Applying the Supreme Court's ruling in Assistant Commissioner of State Tax v. M/s Commercial Steel Limited, which confines writ interference to cases of breach of fundamental rights, violation of natural justice, excess of jurisdiction, or a vires challenge, the Court held that a writ petition was not the appropriate remedy for adjudicating the factual disputes involved in large-scale fraudulent ITC cases.
  • Considering that similarly placed parties (in the SR Impex batch) had already been relegated to the appellate remedy, the Court permitted the petitioner to file a statutory appeal by 15th November, 2025 along with the requisite pre-deposit, directing that it not be dismissed on limitation grounds.

Important Clarification:

  • In cases involving allegations of large-scale fraudulent availment of ITC through fake and dummy entities, where the assessee had actual knowledge of the proceedings (through email service, summons and recorded statements), writ courts will ordinarily decline to examine the factual merits and will relegate the assessee to the statutory appellate remedy under Section 107, consistent with Commercial Steel Ltd.

Sections Involved:

  • Section 107, CGST Act, 2017 — statutory appeal against an adjudication order.
  • Section 132, CGST Act, 2017 — context of fraudulent ITC and related offences referenced in the impugned order.

Decision – In Favour of: Department on the natural-justice contention; disposed of relegating the Assessee to the statutory appellate remedy with protection against limitation.

Case Details: High Court of Delhi at New Delhi; W.P.(C) 10921/2025 & CM APPL. 45022/2025; Coram: Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Shail Jain; Date of Decision: 17th September, 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.