Ypsomed India Pvt. Ltd vs Commissioner Of Delhi Goods And ... on 20 May, 2025

[Cites 6, Cited by 0]

Delhi High Court - Orders

Ypsomed India Pvt. Ltd vs Commissioner Of Delhi Goods And ... on 20 May, 2025

Bench: Prathiba M. Singh

                          $~106
                          *     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                          +         W.P.(C) 6796/2025 & CM APPL. 30799/2025, 30800/2025
                                    YPSOMED INDIA PVT. LTD.                                                                .....Petitioner
                                                                  Through:            Mr. Rajesh Jain, Mr. Virag Tiwari, Mr.
                                                                                      Ramashish, Mr. Rishabh Jain and Ms.
                                                                                      Tanya Saraswat, Advocates.
                                                                  versus

                                    COMMISSIONER OF DELHI GOODS AND SERVICES TAX &
                                    ANR.                                .....Respondents
                                                Through: Ms. Urvi Mohan, Advocate for
                                                          GNCTD.

                                    CORAM:
                                    JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH
                                    JUSTICE RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTA
                                                 ORDER

% 20.05.2025

1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

2. The present writ petition has been filed by the Petitioner under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the show cause notice dated 28th May, 2024 (hereinafter 'impugned SCN') and the consequent order dated 27th August, 2024 (hereinafter 'impugned order').

3. The petition also raises a challenge to the vires of Notification No. 9/2023-Central Tax dated 31st March, 2023, Notification No. 56/2023- Central Tax dated 28th December, 2023 and Notification No. 56/2023-State Tax dated 11th July, 2024 (hereinafter 'impugned notifications').

4. The impugned notifications were under consideration before this Court in a batch of matters with the lead matter being W.P.(C) 16499/2023 titled W.P.(C) 6796/2025 Page 1 of 7 This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 23/06/2025 at 15:33:22 'DJST Traders Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India and Ors.'. In the said batch of petitions, on 22nd April, 2025, the parties were heard at length qua the validity of the impugned notifications and accordingly, the following order was passed:

"4. Submissions have been heard in part. The broad challenge to both sets of Notifications is on the ground that the proper procedure was not followed prior to the issuance of the same. In terms of Section 168A, prior recommendation of the GST Council is essential for extending deadlines. In respect of Notification no.9, the recommendation was made prior to the issuance of the same. However, insofar as Notification No. 56/2023 (Central Tax) the challenge is that the extension was granted contrary to the mandate under Section 168A of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and ratification was given subsequent to the issuance of the notification. The notification incorrectly states that it was on the recommendation of the GST Council. Insofar as the Notification 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 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:

W.P.(C) 6796/2025 Page 2 of 7

This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 23/06/2025 at 15:33:22 "1. The subject matter of challenge before the High Court was to the legality, validity and propriety of the Notification No.13/2022 dated 5-7-2022 & Notification Nos.9 and 56 of 2023 dated 31-3-2023 & 8-12-2023 respectively.

2. However, in the present petition, we are concerned with Notification Nos.9 & 56/2023 dated 31-3- 2023 respectively.

3. These Notifications have been issued in the purported exercise of power under Section 168 (A) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act. 2017 (for short, the "GST Act").

4. We have heard Dr. S. Muralidhar, the learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner.

5. The issue that falls for the consideration of this Court is whether the time limit for adjudication of show cause notice and passing order under Section 73 of the GST Act and SGST Act (Telangana GST Act) for financial year 2019-2020 could have been extended by issuing the Notifications in question under Section 168-A of the GST Act.

6. There are many other issues also arising for consideration in this matter.

7. Dr. Muralidhar pointed out that there is a cleavage of opinion amongst different High Courts of the country. 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 W.P.(C) 6796/2025 Page 3 of 7 This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 23/06/2025 at 15:33:22 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.

67. Since the matter is pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the interim order passed in the present cases, would continue to operate and would be governed by the final adjudication by the Supreme Court on the issues in the aforesaid SLP-4240-2025.

68. In view of the aforesaid, all these connected cases are disposed of accordingly along with pending applications, if any."

8. The Court has heard ld. Counsels for the parties for a substantial period today. A perusal of the above would show that various High Courts have taken a view and the matter is squarely now pending before the Supreme Court.

9. Apart from the challenge to the notifications itself, various counsels submit that even if the same are upheld, they would still pray for relief for the parties as the Petitioners have been unable to file replies due to several reasons and were unable to avail of personal hearings in most cases. In effect therefore in most cases the adjudication orders are passed ex- parte. Huge demands have been raised and even penalties have been imposed.

10. Broadly, there are 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.

W.P.(C) 6796/2025 Page 4 of 7

This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 23/06/2025 at 15:33:22

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."

5. Thereafter, on 23rd April, 2025, this Court, having noted that the validity of the impugned notifications is under consideration before the Supreme Court, had disposed of several matters in the said batch of petitions after addressing other factual issues raised in the respective petitions. Additionally, while disposing of the said petitions, this Court clearly observed that the validity of the impugned notifications therein shall be subject to the outcome of the proceedings before the Supreme Court.

6. However, in cases where the challenge is to the parallel State Notifications, the same have been retained for consideration by this Court. The lead matter in the said batch is W.P.(C) 9214/2024 titled 'Engineers India Limited v. Union of India & Ors'.

7. On facts, however, it is the case of the Petitioner that the impugned order deserves to be set aside due to the fact that the Input Tax Credit of IGST has been wrongly denied on the ground of mismatch between GSTR-2A & 3B. However, it is the submission of the ld. Counsel for the Petitioner that during the relevant year of 2019-20, there was no provision under Rule 60 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Rules which could auto upload credit of IGST in GSTR-2A against the imports.

8. This Court has heard the submissions made. Considering the fact that the present petition involves a legal issue regarding the non-availability of the utility for submission of IGST at the relevant point in time, this Court is of the opinion that the Petitioner ought to be given an opportunity for fresh adjudication as the said issue has not been considered while passing the W.P.(C) 6796/2025 Page 5 of 7 This is a digitally signed order.

"You have filed annual return in GSTR-09 for the financial year 2019-20.

On examination of the information furnished in this return under various heads and also the information furnished in GSTR-01, GSTR-2A, GSTR-3B and other records available in this office it is found that you have not declared your correct tax liability while filing the annual returns of GSTR-09. The summary of under declared tax is as follows:

SGST Rs.0 CGST Rs.0 IGST Rs.25961106 CESS Rs.0 Total Rs.25961106"

9. Further, this Court in W.P.(C) 9546/2024 tilted Charu Overseas Pvt. Ltd. v. Pr. Commissioner of Delhi Goods and Service Tax & Ors. and in W.P. (C) 16072/2024 titled Rahul Singhal Proprietor Shivalik Enterprises v. The Commissioner, Central Tax, Delhi West, Engg. India Ltd. & Ors. has, while deciding upon similar issue, relegated the Petitioner to the adjudicating authority for fresh adjudication.

10. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is relegated to the Adjudicating Authority to be heard on merits.

11. The Petitioner is permitted to file a reply to the SCN by 10th July, 2025. Upon filing of such reply, the Adjudicating Authority shall issue upon the Petitioner a notice for personal hearing which shall be provided on the following email ID and phone number:

E-mail ID: [email protected] Phone Number: 9810042928

12. The reply filed by the Petitioner to the SCN along with the submissions W.P.(C) 6796/2025 Page 6 of 7 This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 23/06/2025 at 15:33:22 made in the personal hearing proceedings shall be duly considered by the Adjudicating Authority and fresh order with respect to the SCN shall be passed accordingly.

13. All the rights and remedies of the parties are left open. Access to the GST Portal, if not already available, shall be ensured to be provided to the Petitioner to enable filing of reply and access to the notices and related documents.

14. However, it is again made clear that the issue in respect of the validity of the impugned notifications is left open and the order of the Adjudicating Authority shall be subject to the outcome of the decision of 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' and of this Court in W.P.(C) 9214/2024 titled 'Engineers India Limited v. Union of India & Ors'

15. The petition is disposed of in the above terms. Pending applications, if any, are also disposed of.

PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J.

RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTA, J.

MAY 20, 2025/MR/ss W.P.(C) 6796/2025 Page 7 of 7 This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 23/06/2025 at 15:33:22

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Delhi High Court - Orders