The Delhi High Court, in its ruling, upheld a ₹35 lakh GST demand raised against Vijay and Company, rejecting the applicant’s appeal to quash the adjudication order passed under Section 73 of the CGST/DGST Act.
As evidence, the court relied on the DRC-06 forms, noting that the taxpayer had been given sufficient opportunity to respond to the show cause notice, though the taxpayer failed to do so.
The order has been challenged by Vijay and Company, through its proprietor, Mrs. Seema Tayal, by filing the writ petition on 5 April 2024, asserting that it was a non-speaking order passed without enough hearing and in breach of the principles of natural justice.
The validity of Notification Nos. 09/2023 and 56/2023 have been challenged by the petitioner, furnished via the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs, which extended the period for GST adjudication proceedings.
The division bench comprising Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Rajneesh Kumar in the hearing said that before SCN dated 8 December 2023, no response was submitted by the applicant even after providing various chances to do so. Notices have been furnished, and the applicant does not answer them, as discovered by the court in DRC-06 forms on record.
The court for the GST notifications challenge noted that similar challenges are pending at present to the Apex court in SLP No. 4240/2025 and abstained from citing any view on their validity. As per the court, the consequence of the petition for the notifications shall be within the final decision of the Apex court.
The writ petition was dismissed, though the court allotted the applicant a chance to submit a plea to the appellate authority within 30 days. The court requested that if an appeal is filed, and the necessary deposit is made, it should be considered based on its merit rather than being thrown out due to timing issues.
| Case Title | Vijay and Company Through Its Proprietor Mrs Seema Tayal V/S Commissioner Delhi GST and Others |
| Case No. | W.P.(C) 8227/2024 |
| Counsel For Appellant | Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Advocate |
| Counsel For Respondent | Mr. Udit Malik, Advocate |
| Delhi High Court | Read Order |
