The Delhi High Court has dismissed the petition with the cost of Rs. 50K for concealing facts and upheld the consolidated Show Cause Notices (SCNs) in fraudulent Input Tax Credit (ITC) cases.
The bench of Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Shail Jain has observed that the plea of Natural Justice was raised vehemently, until the Department established that emails were sent. The plea being taken is that the emails were sent to the email address of the Chartered Accountant. The Court has already noted above that the said email was the registered email address of the Petitioner on the CGST portal. Thus, the notices were rightly sent and this Court is also of the opinion that the relevant and material facts have been concealed from the Court. The Petition was dismissed with costs of Rs.50,000/- to be paid to the CGST Department.
The Petitioner filed the writ petition seeking to set aside the impugned Order- in-Original dated 02nd February, 2025 passed by department. The order was challenged, inter alia, on the ground that the notices for personal hearing were not received by the Petitioner. On previous dates of hearing, i.e., 10th March, 2025 and 17th April, 2025, the CGST Department was directed to place on record any documents to show that the personal hearing notices have been given to the Petitioner in this matter. A set of documents, along with an affidavit, has been placed on record by the CGST Department.
CGST Department has shown to the Court that there were three opportunities for hearing which were given to the Petitioner vide two hearing notices.
The court noted that the e-mail address which has been provided on the GST portal is presumed to be the registered email of the proprietor itself and is not reflected merely as a GST practitioner or consultant’s e-mail.
The court noted that the writ petition is conspicuously silent on this fact that the e-mails for personal hearing were sent to the Petitioner’s registered e-mail address.
The court stated that Section 169(1)(c) of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, a communication sent to an e-mail address provided at the time of GST registration is adequate service of a decision, order, summons or notice or any other communication.
The court held that the notices were rightly sent and dismissed the petition with costs of Rs.50,000/- to be paid to the CGST Department.
Case Details
Case Title: M/S Mathur Polymers Versus Union Of India
Case No.: W.P.(C) 2394/2025 & CM APPL. 11289/2025
Date: 26/08/2025
Counsel For Petitioner: Akhil Krishan Maggu
Counsel For Respondent: Gibran Naushad
