Shri Enterprises v. Union of India & Ors. – Opportunity of Hearing Restored

Court: Delhi High Court
Case No.: W.P.(C) 3704/2025 & CM Appl. 17322/2025
Date of Judgment: 23rd April 2025
Category of Dispute: Adjudication under Section 73 of CGST Act, 2017 – Personal Hearing & Validity of Notifications
Relevant Sections: Section 73, Section 168A of CGST Act, 2017
Impugned Notification: Notification No. 9/2023 – Central Tax dated 31.03.2023

Facts of the Case (¶2–7)

• The petitioner, Shri Enterprises, challenged the Show Cause Notice (SCN) dated 17.09.2023 and the consequent order dated 31.12.2023 passed under Section 73 of the CGST Act, 2017. (¶2)

• The petitioner also challenged Notification No. 9/2023–Central Tax dated 31.03.2023. (¶3)

• The petitioner filed a reply to the SCN on 22.02.2023, but due to the ill health of its proprietor, it could not attend the personal hearing. (¶6)

• Consequently, an ex-parte order was passed by the adjudicating authority. (¶6-7)

Questions in Consideration (¶4–5, 9–10)

1. Whether the impugned Notification No. 9/2023–Central Tax is valid, considering Section 168A of the CGST Act.

2. Whether the impugned order passed under Section 73, without affording a proper personal hearing to the petitioner, is sustainable in law.

Observations of the Court (¶8–12)

• The validity of Notification No. 9/2023 and related issues are already pending before the Supreme Court in SLP No. 4240/2025 (M/s HCC-SEW-MEIL-AAG JV v. ACST & Ors.). Thus, this Court left the issue open. (¶5, ¶12)

• On facts, the petitioner had filed a reply but could not attend the personal hearing. (¶6)

• Since principles of natural justice require a fair hearing, the petitioner must be given an opportunity to appear and present submissions. (¶9)

Judgment of the Court (¶9–13)

• The impugned order was set aside on the ground of denial of personal hearing.

• The matter was remanded to the Adjudicating Authority with directions:

  • To issue a fresh notice of personal hearing to the petitioner (via provided email and mobile number). (¶10)

  • To consider the reply already filed along with fresh submissions. (¶11)

  • To pass a fresh order accordingly. (¶11)

• The challenge to Notification No. 9/2023 was kept open, subject to the Supreme Court’s ruling. (¶12)

Between Fine Lines (5-liner in Simple Words)

• Shri Enterprises challenged a tax demand order under Section 73 CGST.

• It had replied to the SCN but missed the hearing due to ill health.

• The order was passed ex-parte, raising principles of natural justice.

• The High Court restored the right to a personal hearing.

• The validity of Notification 9/2023 will be decided by the Supreme Court.

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.”