Delhi HC Allows Appeal Route for GST SCN Dispute; Validity of Notification 09/2023 Left to SC

Case Reference:

• Case Title: M/s Shree Jain Polymers v. Union of India & Anr.

• Court: High Court of Delhi

• Petition Numbers: W.P.(C) 11131/2024 & W.P.(C) 11180/2024

• Date of Judgement: 06.05.2025 (Corrected & released 13.05.2025)

• Relevant Sections: Section 73, Section 107, Section 168A of the CGST Act, 2017; Notification No. 09/2023-Central Tax dated 31.03.2023

• Category: Limitation period extension under GST; Challenge to Notification; Adjudication procedure

Facts of the Case

(Ref: Para 2, 3, 6)

1. The petitioner challenged SCNs dated 23.09.2023 and 01.12.2023 along with adjudication orders dated 27.12.2023, 11.04.2024, and rejection of rectification applications dated 26.07.2024.

2. The petitioner also assailed Notification No. 09/2023-Central Tax, which extended the limitation period under Section 73 CGST Act, contending procedural irregularities under Section 168A.

3. Petitioner alleged lack of proper hearing and non-consideration of replies before passing ex-parte orders. Records showed replies were filed, hearing was granted but not availed.

Questions in Consideration

(Ref: Para 4, 8, 10)

1. Whether Notification No. 09/2023-Central Tax was validly issued under Section 168A, considering the GST Council’s recommendation process.

2. Whether the adjudication orders deserved interference due to alleged denial of opportunity of hearing.

3. Whether the petitioner could be permitted to pursue appellate remedies despite limitation.

Observation of the Court

(Ref: Para 4–5, 6–8)

1. The validity of Notification No. 09/2023 and related Notification No. 56/2023 is already under consideration before the Supreme Court in SLP No. 4240/2025, with conflicting High Court decisions across India.

2. Multiple High Courts, including Punjab & Haryana HC, have chosen not to rule on vires of Section 168A pending SC decision.

3. On facts, replies were filed but personal hearing was not utilised; rectification requests were duly rejected. Hence, no ground to quash orders.

4. However, given pendency of SC ruling, appellate authority should entertain appeal if filed by 10.07.2025 without limitation bar.

Judgement of the Court

(Ref: Para 7–11)

1. Writ petitions disposed of without interfering in orders, granting liberty to petitioner to file appeal under Section 107 CGST Act with prescribed pre-deposit.

2. If appeal is filed by 10.07.2025, it shall not be rejected on limitation grounds; appellate authority to decide on merits.

3. GST portal access to be ensured for petitioner to view notices and documents.

4. Validity of Notification 09/2023 kept open, subject to outcome of SC decision in SLP No. 4240/2025.

Between Fine Lines

In simple terms:

• The Delhi HC didn’t cancel the GST orders but allowed the taxpayer to appeal despite limitation.

• The validity of the key GST deadline-extension notification is being decided by the Supreme Court.

• Petitioner must deposit the required pre-deposit to appeal.

• Appeals must be filed by 10 July 2025 to avoid dismissal.

• GST portal access must be given for fair opportunity.

Summary of Referred Cases

Disclaimer – “The above summary is for academic purpose only; not formal legal opinion. Seek professional opinion before application. Author or publisher or website shall not be responsible for any usage in any form.”