SC Grants Time to File Appeal Despite Delay in Reply to SCN

GST • News • Case Chronicles

SC Ruling on Section 74 CGST Act
Case Details: Montage Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. Versus Central Goods and Service Tax, Delhi North (2025) 33 Centax 110 (S.C.) 

Judiciary and Counsel Details

  • J.B. PARDIWALA and R. Mahadevan, JJ.
  • S/Shri Mukul RohtagiKavin Gulati, Sr. Advs., Abhishek Singh, AOR and Akshat Choudhary, Adv. for the Petitioner.

Facts of the Case

 The Petitioner, being the assessee, filed a Special Leave Petition (SLP) against the order of the High Court. The factual matrix reveals that the Department of Revenue issued a show cause notice (SCN) alleging issuance of bogus invoices to non-existent or non-operational firms in respect of packaging material and laminates, which were in fact diverted to paan masala and tobacco manufacturing units. The assessee sought extension of time to reply to the SCN and, subsequently, requested copies of relied-upon documents and an opportunity for cross-examination. The Department contended that the assessee was already in possession of the requisite information, as these documents were part of other proceedings. The assessee filed its reply only after a personal hearing notice was issued and raised objections regarding the documents and cross-examination. The High Court held that the assessee had sufficient information to respond to the SCN but failed to do so for six months. It further observed that insolvency proceedings were fraudulently initiated against companies from which recoveries were due, and the belated requests for documents and cross-examination were not bona fide. The High Court concluded that the assessee was not diligent, and writ jurisdiction was not attracted; however, the assessee was free to pursue appellate remedies, and the matter was accordingly placed before the Supreme Court. 

High Court Held

The Hon’ble Supreme Court held that the High Court’s findings were justified. The Court noted that, under Section 74 of the CGST Act and Delhi GST Act, the assessee had all requisite information and documents to reply to the SCN in a timely manner, and the belated requests for documents and cross-examination were not genuine. The Supreme Court granted an extension of time to the assessee to prefer appeal, initially for 30 days, further extended by two months, and clarified that all contentions available to the parties may be raised before the Appellate Authority. 

List of Cases Reviewed

Leave Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Stories
No ITC on Compensation Cess for Coal Used in Township Electricity | HC

GST • News • Case Chronicles

August 27, 2025

Refund Limitation Begins from IGST Payment Date – Not Original CGST/SGST | HC

GST • News • Case Chronicles

August 26, 2025

Baby Net Bed Classifiable as Mattress Support — Taxable at 18% GST | AAR

GST • News • Case Chronicles

August 25, 2025

No Penalty for Not Mentioning Transporter in E-Way Bill | HC

GST • News • Case Chronicles

August 25, 2025

HC Orders Refund Of GST Recovered Before Limitation Period

GST • News • Case Chronicles

August 23, 2025

HC Sets Aside GST Registration Cancellation Over Vague SCN

GST • News • Case Chronicles

August 23, 2025

SC Dismisses SLP | Amendment to Rule 89(5) Applies Retrospectively

GST • News • Case Chronicles

August 22, 2025

GSTR-3B [July 2025] Due Date Extended to August 27 for Maharashtra Districts

GST • News • Statutory Scope

August 22, 2025

Renewal of Provisional Attachment after One Year Invalid | SC

GST • News • Case Chronicles

August 21, 2025

HC Directs GST Dept To Upload Amended DRC-07 For Amnesty

GST • News • Case Chronicles

August 20, 2025