Case Title: M/s Luksun International v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.
Court: Delhi High Court
Petition No.: W.P.(C) 17132/2024 & CM APPL. 72757/2024
Date of Judgement: 23rd April, 2025
Category of Dispute: Input Tax Credit – Demand under Section 73 CGST/DGST Act
Relevant Sections: Section 73, Section 168A of CGST/DGST Act, 2017; Principles of Natural Justice
Facts of the Case
-
The petitioner, M/s Luksun International, challenged the adjudication order dated 25.08.2024 under Section 73 of the CGST/DGST Act confirming demand of ₹9,96,765/- (Para 2, 6).
-
Petitioner also challenged Notification No. 56/2023-Central Tax dated 28.12.2023, arguing it was issued contrary to Section 168A without prior GST Council recommendation (Para 3-4).
-
The adjudication was based on mismatch in GSTR-9 and GSTR-3B for FY 2019-20 concerning ITC on CGTMSE fees (Para 7).
-
Records show that although a reply was filed, no personal hearing was availed before passing the order (Para 8).
Questions in Consideration
-
Whether the adjudication order confirming GST demand without ensuring personal hearing is valid? (Para 6-9)
-
Whether challenge to Notification 56/2023 is maintainable before Delhi High Court given pending SLP in Supreme Court? (Para 5).
Observations of the Court
-
Multiple High Courts have issued conflicting rulings on Notification 56/2023; the matter is now pending before the Supreme Court in SLP No. 4240/2025, M/s HCC-SEW-MEIL-AAG JV v. Assistant Commissioner of State Tax (Para 4-5).
-
Delhi HC observed that the validity of the notification is left to be decided by the Supreme Court (Para 5, 10).
-
On facts, the adjudication order shows the taxpayer’s reply was considered but personal hearing was not granted, violating natural justice (Para 7-8).
Judgement of the Court
-
The impugned adjudication order dated 25.08.2024 is set aside (Para 9).
-
The matter is remanded to the Adjudicating Authority with directions to provide a personal hearing via notice to petitioner’s counsel (email provided) (Para 9).
-
Any fresh order shall be subject to the outcome of the pending Supreme Court ruling on Notification 56/2023 (Para 10).
-
Writ petition disposed accordingly (Para 11).
Between Fine Lines (Simple Summary)
-
GST demand of nearly ₹10 lakhs was raised on mismatch of ITC.
-
The officer passed the order without giving the taxpayer a personal hearing.
-
Delhi HC set aside the order, directing a fresh hearing.
-
Validity of GST Notification 56/2023 remains undecided, awaiting Supreme Court ruling.
-
Taxpayer gets another chance to present their case before the authority.
Summary of Referred Cases
| Case Name | Citation / Petition | Summary | Verdict |
|---|---|---|---|
| DJST Traders Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India & Ors. | W.P.(C) 16499/2023 (Delhi HC) | Lead matter challenging Notification 56/2023 under Sec. 168A CGST Act. | Pending consideration. |
| M/s HCC-SEW-MEIL-AAG JV v. Assistant Commissioner of State Tax & Ors. | SLP No. 4240/2025 (SC) | SC considering validity of extension notifications under Sec. 168A for FY 2019-20. | Pending before SC. |
| Allahabad HC – Challenge to Notification 9/2023 | (Not specified) | Validated Notification 9/2023 on extension of time. | Notification upheld. |
| Patna HC – Challenge to Notification 56/2023 | (Not specified) | Held Notification 56/2023 valid. | Notification upheld. |
| Guwahati HC – Challenge to Notification 56/2023 | (Not specified) | Quashed Notification 56/2023 as contrary to Sec. 168A. | Notification struck down. |
| Telangana HC – Challenge to Notification 56/2023 | (Not specified) | Observed invalidity of Notification 56/2023 but left issue open. | Now under SC review. |
| Punjab & Haryana HC batch matters | Order dated 12.03.2025 | Deferred decision, held all petitions subject to SC outcome. | Interim reliefs continued. |
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.”
