The Delhi High Court has allowed a taxpayer to file an appeal against a confirmed Goods and Services Tax (GST) demand of Rs. 28.86 lakh, even though the statutory deadline for appeal had already expired.
A division bench of Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Shail Jain passed the order while disposing of a writ petition challenging the order issued by the Assistant Commissioner, Shahdara Division, CGST Delhi East Commissionerate.
The bench ruled that the appeal must be entertained on merits if filed by October 31, 2025, despite the lapse of limitation.
The dispute arose after a show cause notice (SCN) was issued in November 2024, alleging excess availment of Input Tax Credit (ITC) for the tax period April 2020 to March 2021. The adjudicating authority later confirmed a demand of nearly ₹29 lakh in February 2025.
The taxpayer argued that the SCN and subsequent hearing notices were never served. According to its counsel, the registered e-mail domain linked to the GST account had expired, and with the business shifting operations to another state and undergoing changes in directorship, the notices were not accessed on the GST portal. The taxpayer only discovered the demand in June 2025, while visiting the GST office for closure of its registration.
The CGST Department argued that the notices were validly served, as they were uploaded on the GST portal and also sent via registered post and email. Although the email reportedly bounced, the court noted that uploading notices on the GST portal is considered sufficient service under GST law.
The bench held that the taxpayer failed to prove non-service of notices, emphasizing that registered entities are expected to monitor the GST portal for communications. However, the judges observed that the taxpayer had not been able to present its case on merits, and therefore directed that an appellate remedy be made available.
The taxpayer is permitted to file an appeal by October 31, 2025. The appeal cannot be dismissed on limitation grounds and must be adjudicated on merits. The statutory pre-deposit requirement must be complied with.
Case Details
Case Title: SEVEN SEAS LIGHTS PVT. LTD. Versus ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
Case No.: W.P.(C) 9791/2025 & CM APPL. 40963/2025
Date: 23/09/2025
Counsel For Petitioner: Puneet Rai
Counsel For Respondent: Shubham Tyagi
 demand of Rs. 28.86 lakh, even though the statutory deadline for appeal had already expired. ){kind=link}