TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (1) TMI 1342
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, quashing the Show Cause Notice With Reference No. ZD071223082410T dated 15.12.2023 issued by the Ld. Respondent; (ii) To issue a writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, quashing the Impugned Order bearing reference number ZD070424006580R dated 03.04.2024 passed by the Ld. Respondent; (iii) To issue order(s), direction(s), writ(s) or any other relief(s) as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice; (iv) Pass any other order(s) as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and more appropriate in order to grant relief to the petitioner." 3. Ms. Priyanka Rathi, learned counsel for the petitione....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ere sent and as such there was no substantial service of notice on the petitioner which resulted in denial of opportunity of hearing. 6. It is claimed that the petitioner is willing to appear before the respondent by submitting their reply if an opportunity is given and the respondent be directed to pass a reasoned order after granting personal hearing. 7. It is further urged that the issue is squarely covered by the Division Bench Judgment of this Court in paragraph no. 4 of judgment passed in W.P.(C) 2727/2025, Neelgiri Machinery vs. Commissioner Delhi GST. The paragraph no. 4 of the said judgment is reproduced hereinbelow: "4. The challenge in the present petition is similar to a batch of petitions wherein, inter alia, the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n no. 9. The Patna High Court has upheld the validity of Notification no. 56. Whereas, the Guwahati High Court has quashed Notification No. 56 of 2023 (Central Tax). 6. The Telangana High Court while not delving into the vires of the assailed notifications, made certain observations in respect of invalidity of Notification No. 56 of 2023 (Central Tax). This judgment of the Telangana High Court is now presently under consideration by the Supreme Court in S.L.P No 4240/2025 titled M/s HCC-SEW-MEIL-AAG JV v. Assistant Commissioner of State Tax &Ors. The Supreme Court vide order dated 21st February, 2025, passed the following order in the said case: "1. The subject matter of challenge before the High Court was to the legality,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssed therein. The operative portion of the said order reads as under: "65. Almost all the issues, which have been raised before us in these present connected cases and have been noticed hereinabove, are the subject matter of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the aforesaid SLP. 66. Keeping in view the judicial discipline, we refrain from giving our opinion with respect to the vires of Section 168-A of the Act as well as the notifications issued in purported exercise of power under Section 168-A of the Act which have been challenged, and we direct that all these present connected cases shall be governed by the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the decision thereto shall be binding on these cases too. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ating authority. In some cases, proceedings including appellate remedies may be permitted to be pursued by the Petitioners, without delving into the question of the validity of the said notifications at this stage. 11. The said categories and proposed reliefs have been broadly put to the parties today. They may seek instructions and revert by tomorrow i.e., 23rd April, 2025." The aforementioned judgment was further followed in Etemad Cargo vs. Assistant Commissioner, (2025) 31 Centax 189 (Del.) Centax 176 (Del.). 8. As against above, the petitioner's contentions are resisted by the learned counsel for the respondent on two forms: (a) That the reasons furnished by the petitioner in support of the prayer clause is the ....