Facts of the Case

The Petitioner challenged:

  • Show Cause Notice dated 16 May 2024, and
  • Demand Order dated 28 August 2024 passed by the Sales Tax Officer.

The petition also questioned the validity (vires) of various GST notifications extending limitation periods under Section 168A of the CGST Act.

The matter formed part of a broader batch of petitions where similar notifications were under challenge across multiple High Courts and also pending before the Supreme Court. 

Issues Involved

  1. Whether GST Notifications extending limitation under Section 168A were valid.
  2. Whether the High Court should interfere in writ jurisdiction when an alternate appellate remedy under Section 107 CGST Act is available.
  3. Whether adjudication orders passed allegedly ex-parte warrant judicial interference. 

Petitioner’s Arguments

  • The impugned notifications were invalid due to non-compliance with mandatory GST Council recommendations under Section 168A.
  • Extensions of limitation were allegedly granted improperly and retrospectively.
  • The demand order was challenged as being passed without adequate opportunity.

Respondent’s Arguments

  • The issue of validity of notifications is already under consideration before multiple High Courts and the Supreme Court.
  • The Petitioner has an effective alternative remedy of appeal under Section 107 CGST Act.
  • The writ petition is not maintainable in view of the available statutory remedy.

Court’s Findings / Order

  • The Court noted that the validity of GST notifications is pending before the Supreme Court in SLP No. 4240/2025 (M/s HCC-SEW-MEIL-AAG JV case).
  • Since the Petitioner had already filed an appeal under Section 107 CGST Act:
    • The High Court declined to exercise writ jurisdiction.
  • The Court directed:
    • The appeal shall be decided on merits.
    • It shall not be dismissed on limitation grounds, provided mandatory pre-deposit is made.
  • Access to the GST portal must be ensured to the Petitioner.
  • All rights and remedies of the parties were kept open.
  • The outcome of appellate proceedings will remain subject to Supreme Court’s decision on notification validity. 

Important Clarifications by the Court

  • High Court will not interfere when statutory appeal remedy exists, especially in tax matters.
  • Relief can still be granted by ensuring:
    • Appeal is heard on merits
    • No rejection on limitation
  • Validity of GST notifications under Section 168A remains open and sub judice before the Supreme Court.

Link to download the order -  https://delhihighcourt.nic.in/app/showFileJudgment/68907052025CW178382024_164530.pdf 

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.