Petitions Dismissed Due to Forged Aadhar and Fake GST Show Cause Notices

Court & Case Details:

• Case Title: M/s S R Enterprises & Others v. Principal Commissioner of Goods and Services Tax, East Delhi

• Court: Delhi High Court

• Petition Numbers: W.P.(C) 685/2025, 1314/2025, 2461/2025, 2867/2025

• Category: Cancellation of GST Registration – Fraudulent Petitions

• Judgment Date: 28 May 2025

• Relevant Sections: CGST Act, Section 29 read with Rule 22(1) of CGST Rules

• Coram: Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Rajneesh Kumar Gupta

Between Fine Lines:

Petitioners filed writs to set aside GST registration cancellations, alleging non-speaking show cause notices. However, investigation revealed forged Aadhaar cards and fabricated SCNs were used to mislead the Court. The Delhi High Court flagged grave procedural fraud, holding that the writs were filed by fictitious entities. The Court directed inquiry and UIDAI cooperation for further criminal investigation.
Practical takeaway: Courts may reopen cases on discovering fraudulent filings, including falsified identity documents or fabricated notices.

Facts of the Case:

[Para 2–4]

• Petitioners challenged cancellation of their GST registrations citing vague or reasonless SCNs dated between September 2024 and February 2025.

• On this basis, the predecessor bench set aside the cancellations relying on decision in Riddhi Siddhi Enterprises v. CGST South Delhi.

• Later, the GST Department filed review petitions, revealing the SCNs annexed by petitioners were forged; real SCNs did contain reasons.

[Para 5–9]

• Investigation by Police and UIDAI revealed the Aadhaar card of one Mr. Aman (linked to M/s Compact Enterprises) was forged; actual person was a domestic help, unaware of the petition.

• Bank account statements showed M/s Compact Enterprises received ₹19.40 crore in four months.

• Landlord and family members denied involvement or knowledge of the petition.

Questions in Consideration:

[Implicit in Paras 2–4, 14]

1. Whether the SCNs on record were genuine and whether registration cancellations were validly challenged?

2. Whether petitions were filed by real and lawful persons with standing to seek relief?

Observations of the Court:

[Paras 4–14]

• Forged Aadhaar Cards and fabricated SCNs were used to obtain judicial relief.

• The Aadhaar details of petitioners did not match the actual individuals found by police inquiries.

• Oath Commissioner Ms. Shilpa Verma could not confirm if petitioners appeared before her physically.

• Counsel for petitioners received cash payments and failed to adequately verify client identities.

Judgment of the Court:

[Paras 14–20]

• Petitions were filed by fictitious or unknown persons using forged documents.

• UIDAI data was disclosed to the authorities given the magnitude of illegality.

• The Court directed the SHO, UIDAI, and GST department to further investigate and produce Mr. Aman in court on 29 May 2025.

• Matter was adjourned for further hearing and interim custody of registers and reports was ordered.

Summary of Referred Cases: