Facts of the Case

The petitioner, R.K. Plastic through its proprietor Ashok Kumar, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging:

  • The validity of Notification No. 9/2023-Central Tax dated 31.03.2023 and Notification No. 56/2023-Central Tax dated 28.12.2023,
  • Corresponding State Notifications under the Delhi GST Act,
  • A Show Cause Notice dated 23.05.2024, and
  • An adjudication order dated 10.08.2024 for FY 2019–20.

The challenge primarily revolved around the legality of extending limitation periods for adjudication under GST law without proper compliance with statutory requirements.

Additionally, the petitioner contended that the adjudication order was passed ex parte and was non-speaking in nature, as no proper opportunity of hearing was granted.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether the impugned GST notifications extending limitation under Section 168A of the CGST Act, 2017 are valid in law.
  2. Whether an adjudication order passed without reply and personal hearing violates principles of natural justice.
  3. Whether relief can be granted when the validity of notifications is already pending before the Supreme Court.

Petitioner’s Arguments

  • The impugned notifications were ultra vires the CGST Act and Delhi GST Act.
  • Extension of limitation was done without proper recommendation of the GST Council, as required under Section 168A.
  • The adjudication order was:
    • Cryptic and non-speaking,
    • Passed without considering any reply,
    • Issued without granting effective opportunity of personal hearing.
  • Hence, the order deserved to be set aside.

Respondent’s Arguments

  • The petitioner was given:
    • Opportunity to file reply, and
    • Opportunity of personal hearing,
      but failed to avail the same.
  • Therefore, the adjudication order confirming demand was justified.
  • The validity of notifications is already under consideration before higher judicial forums, including the Supreme Court. 

Court’s Findings / Order

The Delhi High Court observed:

  • The issue regarding validity of the impugned notifications is:
    • Pending before the Supreme Court in SLP No. 4240/2025 (M/s HCC-SEW-MEIL-AAG JV v. Assistant Commissioner of State Tax & Ors.).
  • Various High Courts have taken divergent views, making the issue unsettled.

Key Findings:

  • The petitioner failed to:
    • File reply, and
    • Attend personal hearing.
  • However, considering the overall circumstances, the Court held that:
    • One more opportunity should be granted in the interest of justice.

Final Order:

  • The impugned adjudication order dated 10.08.2024 was set aside.
  • The matter was remanded back to the Adjudicating Authority.
  • Directions issued:
    • Petitioner to file reply by 10th July 2025,
    • Authority to grant personal hearing,
    • Pass a fresh reasoned order on merits.
  • All rights and remedies were kept open.
  • The outcome shall be subject to the Supreme Court’s decision on validity of notifications.

Important Clarification

  • The Court did not decide the validity of the GST notifications.
  • The adjudication proceedings and final outcome will be:
    • Subject to the Supreme Court’s ruling, and
    • Dependent on related pending matters including Engineers India Ltd. v. Union of India.
  • The order emphasizes natural justice over procedural default.

Sections Involved

  • Article 226 of the Constitution of India
  • Section 168A, Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
  • Section 73, CGST Act, 2017 (Adjudication of tax demand)

Link to download the order -  https://delhihighcourt.nic.in/app/showFileJudgment/68907052025CW44732025_154312.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.