The Delhi High Court has held that the adjournment on medical grounds must be considered empathetically by the Goods and Service Tax (GST) Department.

The bench of Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Rajneesh Kumar Gupta has observed that when requests for adjournment are made on the medical grounds, obviously the Department is expected to consider the same and not proceed to pass orders.

The Petitioner/assessee has challenged the repeated issuance of show cause notices by the Delhi Goods and Service Tax Department and challenges the order on the ground that despite a specific reply having been placed on record that the Petitioner was suffering from a stroke, the Department proceeded and passed the order. 

In this case, there are three SCNs which were issued. In the show cause notice, an order was passed.

The petitioner submitted that instead of giving a fresh hearing, a second show cause notice was issued. The reply to the same was filed by the Petitioner and the demand was dropped. A third show cause notice was issued in respect of which a reply was filed by the Petitioner. A hearing notice is fixed in this matter. However, an adjournment was sought by the Petitioner by filing a reply.

The Petitioner had sought an adjournment on the ground that Vikas Garg the Petitioner’s proprietor had suffered a brain stroke and was not in a position for a hearing. Instead of considering the adjournment request, the Department passed the order raising a demand of approximately Rs.1.5 crores.

The court noted that there is no doubt that the Petitioner has been continuously following up with the Department and filing replies diligently. The medical ground ought to have been considered empathetically as the same was accompanied with all the documents from Indraprastha Apollo Hospital.

The court directed that the Petitioner shall be afforded a hearing.  The hearing notice shall be communicated to the Petitioner on the portal and after hearing the Petitioner, orders shall be passed in accordance with law.

Case Details

Case Title: M/S Jai Optical Versus Govt. Of NCT Of Delhi & Ors.

Case No.: W.P.(C) 5300/2025 & CM APPLs.24175/2025, 24176/2025, 24177/2025

Date: 25th April, 2025

Counsel For Petitioner: Sourabh Goel

Counsel For Respondent: Vaishali Gupta

Read More: No Detention Charges For Good Detained By Customs For Verifying Entries: Calcutta High Court