HomeOther LawsDelhi High Court Appoints Sparsh Bhargava as Nodal Counsel in Anti-Profiteering Cases

Delhi High Court Appoints Sparsh Bhargava as Nodal Counsel in Anti-Profiteering Cases

Published on

🚀 Stay Connected With JurisHour

WhatsApp X Telegram

In a significant development in the ongoing anti-profiteering litigation, the High Court, on May 9, 2025, appointed Advocate Sparsh Bhargava as one of the nodal counsels from the petitioners’ side to oversee the sector-wise grouping of pending matters. This move aims to streamline hearings in the high-profile anti-profiteering batch matters.

Under the direction of the Court, efforts have been made to classify each pending case based on the sector involved, such as retail, FMCG, real estate, and others. While a majority of the parties and their legal representatives have submitted the necessary details to aid this classification, several matters remain unresponded.

Advocate Sparsh Bhargava has urged counsels representing parties in these unresponsive matters (list attached at the end of the article) to come forward at the earliest with the relevant sector classification and case particulars. “Since the complete list of grouped matters must be submitted to the bench today, immediate cooperation is crucial,” Bhargava stated.

He further requested that if any legal representatives are aware of the counsels acting in these cases, they should facilitate communication promptly. This collaboration will ensure comprehensive representation and procedural efficiency before the Court.

Zoheb Hossain, Standing Counsel, continues to represent the government’s side in this multifaceted litigation, while Advocate Sparsh Bhargava, now acting as one of the nodal counsels, leads the coordination efforts for the petitioners.

The High Court’s initiative to organize the matters sector-wise reflects its intent to expedite the hearings in these economically significant cases concerning alleged profiteering under GST regulations.

Read More: How To Save Money Fast On Low Income in India (2025 Guide)

Mariya Paliwala
Mariya Paliwalahttps://www.jurishour.in/
Mariya is the Senior Editor at Juris Hour. She has 7+ 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 her career as a freelance tax reporter in the leading online legal news companies.

Latest articles

JURISHOUR | TAX LAW DAILY BULLETIN : 28 JULY, 2026

Here’s the Tax Law Daily Bulletin for July 28, 2026.GSTGSTAT PRINCIPAL BENCH TAKES UP...

No Penalty for Monthly Liquor Quota Shortfall if Annual Minimum Guaranteed Quantity Is Fully Achieved: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has held that a country liquor licensee who has fulfilled the...

Mere Interpretation of ‘Input Service’ Can’t Trigger Extended Limitation Under CENVAT Law: CESTAT

The Chennai Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has...

End-Use in Motor Vehicles Can’t Override Specific Customs Tariff Classification for Differential Gears: CESTAT

The Chennai Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has...

More like this

JURISHOUR | TAX LAW DAILY BULLETIN : 28 JULY, 2026

Here’s the Tax Law Daily Bulletin for July 28, 2026.GSTGSTAT PRINCIPAL BENCH TAKES UP...

No Penalty for Monthly Liquor Quota Shortfall if Annual Minimum Guaranteed Quantity Is Fully Achieved: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has held that a country liquor licensee who has fulfilled the...

Mere Interpretation of ‘Input Service’ Can’t Trigger Extended Limitation Under CENVAT Law: CESTAT

The Chennai Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has...