Facts of the Case

M/S. IDN Homes Pvt. Ltd. challenged an order dated 10th August, 2024 (for Financial Year 2019-20) passed by the Sales Tax Officer Class-II/AVATO, Delhi, as well as the underlying Show Cause Notice dated 23rd May, 2024, and further challenged Notification No. 56/2023-Central Tax and the corresponding State Tax notification, both extending the limitation period for adjudication under Section 168A of the CGST Act, 2017. The petitioner had not filed any reply to the SCN, explaining that the GST portal's login credentials were held by its accountant, who neither shared them nor himself noticed the SCN despite three reminders. The impugned order raised a total demand exceeding Rs.9.24 lakh in CGST, SGST and IGST across three line items for FY 2019-20.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether the validity of Notification No. 56/2023 (Central Tax and State Tax), extending the time limit for adjudication under Section 168A, needed to be decided in this petition, given pending Supreme Court proceedings.
  2. Whether an ex-parte order passed without the petitioner filing a reply, allegedly due to loss of portal access, warranted a remand.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • The impugned notifications extending limitation under Section 168A were invalid, as the mandatory prior recommendation of the GST Council was not obtained (for the Central notification) or the extension itself was issued beyond the permissible time (for the State notification).
  • Even if the notifications were upheld, the petitioner deserved an opportunity to be heard, since it could not access the portal (its accountant, who held the credentials, neither shared them nor noticed the SCN) and had thus been unable to file any reply.

Respondent's Arguments

  • The Department relied on the impugned order raising the demand and did not dispute that no reply had in fact been filed.

Court Order / Findings

  • The Court traced the pending challenge to Notification Nos. 9 and 56 of 2023 before multiple High Courts and the Supreme Court in M/s HCC-SEW-MEIL-AAG JV v. Assistant Commissioner of State Tax & Ors., SLP No. 4240/2025, noting that different High Courts (Allahabad, Patna, Guwahati, Telangana) had taken divergent views, and that the Punjab & Haryana High Court had deferred entirely to the pending Supreme Court proceedings.
  • Following its own consistent practice (as in Sugandha Enterprises v. Commissioner Delhi GST), the Court held that since no reply had been filed to the SCN and the Petitioner was not afforded a proper opportunity of hearing, the matter deserved to be remanded regardless of the pending vires challenge.
  • The impugned order dated 10.08.2024 was set aside; the petitioner was granted time until 30th November, 2025 to file its reply, following which a personal hearing notice was to be issued and a fresh order passed after considering the reply and hearing.
  • The challenge to the impugned notifications was expressly kept open, and any fresh order was made subject to the outcome of the Supreme Court's decision in HCC-SEW-MEIL-AAG JV and of the Delhi High Court's own lead matter, Engineers India Limited v. Union of India. A cost of Rs.10,000/- was imposed on the petitioner for its earlier non-response.

Important Clarification

  • Where the validity of Notification No. 56/2023 (Central Tax and State Tax) extending Section 168A timelines is under consideration before the Supreme Court, the Delhi High Court's consistent approach is to grant an opportunity to reply and be heard in individual ex-parte cases, while expressly keeping the vires challenge open and subjecting any fresh order to the eventual Supreme Court ruling — rather than deciding the notification's validity itself.
  • A taxpayer's loss of access to its own GST portal login (e.g., an accountant leaving without handing over credentials) is treated as a ground for remand on natural-justice grounds, though typically coupled with a costs order for the resulting non-compliance.

Sections Involved

  • Section 168A, CGST Act, 2017 – power to extend time limits for adjudication in special circumstances, on recommendation of the GST Council.
  • Notification No. 56/2023-Central Tax and corresponding State Tax notification – extending limitation for passing orders under Section 73 for FY 2019-20, whose validity remains sub judice.

Decision – In Favour of

Disposed of with directions; in favour of the Assessee on the natural-justice/remand issue, with the notification-validity question expressly left open pending the Supreme Court's ruling.

Case Details

  • Court: High Court of Delhi at New Delhi
  • Case No.: W.P.(C) 15393/2025 & CM APPL. 63067/2025
  • Coram: Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Shail Jain
  • Date of Order: 8 October 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.