TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (2) TMI 947
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nder Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, challenging the impugned order dated 2nd August 2024, passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Ward 201, Zone-11, Delhi for the tax period April 2019 to March 2020 (hereinafter, 'impugned order'). The Petitioner has also challenged the Show Cause Notice dated 29th May, 2024 passed by the Sales Tax Officer Class II/AVATO, Ward 201, Zone 11, Delhi (hereinafter, 'impugned SCN'). 3. Vide the impugned order, a tax demand of Rs. 44,84,321/- and a total demand to the tune of Rs. 86,63,462/- has been raised against the Petitioner. 4. Additionally, the present petition also challenges the vires of the following notifications: • Notification No. 9/2023- Central Tax da....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ication No. 56 of 2023 (State Tax) is concerned, the challenge is to the effect that the same was issued on 11th July, 2024 after the expiry of the limitation in terms of the Notification No.13 of 2022 (State Tax). 5. In fact, Notification Nos. 09 and 56 of 2023 (Central Tax) were challenged before various other High Courts. The Allahabad Court has upheld the validity of Notification 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 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ntry. 8. Issue notice on the SLP as also on the prayer for interim relief, returnable on 7-3- 2025." 7. In the meantime, the challenges were also pending before the Bombay High Court and the Punjab and Haryana High Court. In the Punjab and Haryana High Court vide order dated 12th March, 2025, all the writ petitions have been disposed of in terms of the interim orders passed 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 op....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... six categories of cases which are pending before this Court. While the issue concerning the validity of the impugned notifications is presently under consideration before the Supreme Court, this Court is of the prima facie view that, depending upon the categories of petitions, orders can be passed affording an opportunity to the Petitioners to place their stand before the adjudicating 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.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n merits. 9. The Court has heard the parties. This Court in W.P.(C) 4779/2025 titled 'Sugandha Enterprises through its Proprietor Devender Kumar Singh V. Commissioner Delhi Goods And Service Tax And Others', under similar circumstances where no reply was filed to the SCN had remanded the matter in the following terms: "6. On facts, however, the submission of the Petitioner in the present petition is that the Petitioner was not afforded with an opportunity to file a reply to the SCN dated 23rd May, 2024 and the impugned order was passed without affording the Petitioner with an opportunity to be heard. Hence, the impugned order is a non-speaking order and is liable to be set aside on the said ground. 7. Heard. The Court h....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....shall be communicated to the Petitioner on the following mobile no. and e-mail address:...." 10. Under such circumstances, considering the fact that the Petitioner did not get a proper opportunity to be heard and no reply to the impugned SCN has been filed by the Petitioner, the matter deserves to be remanded back to the concerned Adjudicating Authority, as the challenge to the Notifications is pending consideration. 11. The impugned order is accordingly set aside, subject to payment of Rs. 10,000/- as costs which goes to the Sales Tax Bar Association. The bank account details are as under: Name: Sales Tax Bar Association Account No.: 90672010003811 Bank Name: Canara Bank IFSC Code: CNRB0019067 1....