No Effort Was Made By Petitioner To File Reply Or Documents: Delhi High Court Upholds Order Demanding Wrongfully Availed ITC
1610 Days Delay In Filing Appeal Condoned On Payment Of 5 Lakhs Cost To Customs Commissioner: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has held that upholds the Order Demanding wrongfully availed Input Tax Credit (ITC) as the petitioner did not make any efforts to file reply or documents.
The bench of Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Rajneesh Kumar Gupta has observed that the Department has given the show cause notice and the personal hearing notices to the Petitioner and the petitioner has not been diligent, so the Department cannot be held to blame for not giving a proper hearing.
The petitioner has challenged the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Division MCIE, CGST Delhi East confirming demand of Input Tax Credit of Rs. 34,92,903/- availed without receipt of goods along with equivalent penalty and appropriate interest.
The petitioner contended that the personal hearings were fixed on 13th, 14th and 15th January, 2025. He joined the link on 15th January, 2025 at 12:00 PM, however, he was not granted access to attend the hearing.
A perusal of the record would show that there are two show cause notices which have been issued. No reply to the Show Cause Notice was filed by the Petitioner even after the notice for personal hearing, which was sent on 8th January, 2025.
The court noted that no reply was also filed to the show cause notice even after the alleged access to the personal hearing was not granted. Beyond that, no effort was made by the Petitioner to either file the reply or file the documents physically or otherwise. The order was passed on 28th January, 2025 almost two weeks after the date of personal hearing. From the above circumstances it is clear that the Petitioner has not been diligent in filing the reply and attending the hearings.
The court disposed of the petition with the liberty to the Petitioner to avail its appellate remedies within 30 days along with the pre-deposit. If the same is filed within the time stipulated, the concerned appellate authority shall not dismiss the appeal on the ground of limitation and shall decide the appeal on merits.
Case Details
Case Title: Pret Study By Janak Fashions Private Limited Versus Assistant Commissioner, Division Mcie, Cgst Delhi East Commissionerate
Case No.: W.P.(C) 5878/2025
Date: 05.05.2025
Counsel For Petitioner: Salil Arora
Counsel For Respondent: Vishal Chadha, Sr. Standing Counsel
Mariya is the Senior Editor at JurisHour. She has 5+ years of experience on covering tax litigation stories from the Supreme Court, High Courts and various tribunals including CESTAT, ITAT, NCLAT, NCLT, etc. Mariya graduated from MLSU Law College, Udaipur (Raj.) with B.A.LL.B. and also holds an LL.M. She started as a freelance tax reporter in the leading online legal news companies like LiveLaw & Taxscan.
