Facts of the Case

India Steel, through its proprietor Anis, challenged a Show Cause Notice dated 18th December 2023 pertaining to FY 2018-19 and the consequent order dated 10th April 2024 passed by the Sales Tax Officer, Delhi, along with the vires of Notification No. 56/2023-Central Tax and the corresponding State Tax notification issued under Section 168A of the CGST Act. This formed part of the same large Delhi High Court batch (lead matter: DJST Traders Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India) in which the core notification-validity question remains pending before the Supreme Court in SLP No. 4240/2025. On facts, the SCN was uploaded on the 'Additional Notices Tab' and a reminder issued on 23rd February 2024 was similarly placed, so the petitioner never came to know of it and no reply was filed before the impugned order was passed.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether the demand order dated 10th April 2024, arising from an SCN uploaded prior to the January 2024 portal fix on the 'Additional Notices Tab', should be set aside for want of a genuine opportunity to be heard.
  2. Whether the challenge to Notification No. 56/2023 (Central and State Tax) under Section 168A should await the Supreme Court's ruling in SLP No. 4240/2025.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • The SCN dated 18th December 2023 and the subsequent reminder were both uploaded only under the 'Additional Notices Tab', which was not part of the general, visible notices menu prior to 16th January 2024, so the petitioner had no knowledge of it and could not respond.
  • The impugned order was accordingly passed without the petitioner having any opportunity to challenge the case on merits.
  • The impugned notifications extending the limitation for adjudication under Section 168A were themselves ultra vires, an issue raised in common with the DJST Traders batch.

Respondent's Arguments

  • The Department relied on the fact that after 16th January 2024, the GST portal was reconfigured so that the 'Additional Notices & Orders' tab became visible alongside the general 'Notices & Orders' tab, addressing the underlying grievance for notices issued thereafter.

Court Order / Findings

  • The Court traced its own batch order dated 22nd April 2025 in DJST Traders Pvt. Ltd., which recorded the divergent views of the Allahabad, Patna, Guwahati and Telangana High Courts on Notification Nos. 9 and 56 of 2023, and noted the issue was squarely pending before the Supreme Court in SLP No. 4240/2025.
  • Since the SCN in this case was issued before the January 2024 portal fix and the petitioner did not have knowledge of it, the Court held that the petitioner was not afforded a proper opportunity to be heard, warranting remand regardless of the pending notification challenge, consistent with its approach in Neelgiri Machinery.
  • The impugned order was set aside; the petitioner was granted time till 25th July 2025 to file its reply to the SCN, with the personal-hearing notice to be communicated to the petitioner's mobile/e-mail in addition to the portal.
  • The Court kept the notification-validity question open, to be governed by the outcome before the Supreme Court and the parallel Engineers India Limited batch.

Important Clarification

  • A pre-January-2024 GST show cause notice uploaded only under the portal's 'Additional Notices Tab' continues to be treated by the Delhi High Court as a valid, independent ground for remand, regardless of the still-pending challenge to the Section 168A limitation-extension notifications.
  • Relief granted on this service-defect ground is consistently made expressly 'subject to' the outcome of the Section 168A notification challenge pending before the Supreme Court, so assessees should not treat such remands as a final resolution of the notification-validity issue.

Sections Involved

  • Section 168A, CGST Act, 2017 — power to extend time limits for completion of proceedings on GST Council recommendation, basis of the challenged notifications.
  • Notification No. 56/2023-Central Tax & State Tax — extension of limitation for passing orders under Section 73 for FY 2018-19, the specific notification challenged here.
  • Article 226, Constitution of India — writ jurisdiction invoked for both the notification challenge and the natural-justice ground.

Decision – In Favour of

The decision is disposed of with directions, in favour of the assessee (India Steel) on the facts of service, while the larger notification-validity question is left open pending the Supreme Court's ruling.

Case Details

High Court of Delhi at New Delhi; W.P.(C) 9439/2025 & CM APPL. 39895/2025; Coram: Hon'ble Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Hon'ble Justice Rajneesh Kumar Gupta; Order dated 9th July 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.