Delhi High Court
Laxmi Traders Proprietor Dipanshu Garg vs Principal Commissioner Of Gst ... on 5 April, 2024
Author: Sanjeev Sachdeva
Bench: Sanjeev Sachdeva
$~13
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
%
Date of decision: 05.04.2024
+ W.P.(C) 4977/2024 & CM APPLs. 20372-73/2024
LAXMI TRADERS PROPRIETOR
DIPANSHU GARG .... Petitioner
versus
PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF GST DEPARTMENT OF
TRADE AND TAXES & ANR ..... Respondents
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner: Mr. V.S. Negi and Ms. Sangeeta Rana,
Advocates.
For the Respondents: Mr. Rajeeev Agarwal, ASC with Ms. Samiksha
Jain, Advocate.
CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA
JUDGMENT
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)
1. Petitioner impugns order dated 07.02.2024, whereby a demand
has been created against the petitioner and the same has been set off
against blocked ITC.
2. Issue notice. Notice is accepted by learned counsel appearing
for respondents.
3. With the consent of parties, petition is taken up for final
disposal.
4. Learned counsel for respondent No.1, under instructions
submits that there does not appear to be any show cause notice or
DRC-01 issued to the petitioner prior to passing of the impugned
order.
5. The impugned order is purportedly an order passed under
Section 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 ["the
Act"], creating a demand.
6. Section 73 of the Act mandates issuance of show cause notice
prior to passing an order creating a demand. In the instant case,
admittedly, no show cause notice was issued to the petitioner prior to
impugned order being passed.
7. A show cause notice dated 16.06.2023 was issued proposing to
cancel the GST registration of the petitioner, however, the said
proceedings were dropped by order dated 25.08.2023 upon
consideration of the reply of the petitioner.
8. Since no show cause notice was issued prior to passing of
impugned order, on the said technical ground alone, this order is liable
to be set aside. The same is accordingly quashed.
9. It is clarified that it would be open to the respondents to pass an
appropriate order after giving a proper show cause notice and an
opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner.
10. It is clarified that this Court has neither considered nor
commented on the merits of contentions of either party and the
impugned order has been set aside solely on the ground of infraction
of principles of natural justice. All rights and contentions of the parties
are reserved
11. Petition is accordingly disposed of in the above terms.
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J
RAVINDER DUDEJA, J
APRIL 05, 2024/vp
