2025 (4) TMI 1237 - HC - GST

Identity Mismatch Derails CM Application: Signature, Name, and Ownership Discrepancies Lead to Rejection

HC rejected CM application due to significant identity discrepancies. Petitioner's signature, name spelling, and firm ownership details did not align. ... Seeking modification of order dated 12th September, 2024, extension for filing a response to SCN - HELD THAT:- A perusal of the sample signature shows that it does not match the signature filed with the affidavit in support of the Petition and with the present application. The rent agreement which was handed over by the ld. Counsel for the Respondent also has a different signature of the Petitioner - Moreover, the spelling of the name of the Petitioner is also different. In some places, he used the name ‘SINGHAL’ but when he signed before the Court it was stated ‘SINGAL’. The Aadhar Card also has the Petitioner’s name as Singhal. The Court is not satisfied as to the genuinity and the identity of the Petitioner. The application is not liable to be allowed. The Delhi High Court, in an order dated April 2025, addressed CM Application 19186/2025 filed by Petitioner Singhal Singh Rawat under Section 151 CPC seeking modification of an earlier order dated 12.09.2024, specifically an extension for filing a response to a show cause notice dated 17.11.2022. The Court noted discrepancies regarding the Petitioner's identity: the sample signature provided in court did not match the signature on the affidavit or the rent agreement submitted by the Respondent; the spelling of the Petitioner's name varied between 'Singhal' and 'Singal'; and the Petitioner was unclear about the ownership of certain firms mentioned in the rent agreement. Given these inconsistencies, the Court held it was 'not satisfied as to the genuinity and the identity of the Petitioner,' and accordingly refused to grant the application. The Court recorded the sample signature and Aadhar Card on record and disposed of the application.