Writ Dismissed as Reply and Documents Were Duly Considered | HC

GST • News • Case Chronicles

ITC denial due to retrospective cancellation
Case Details: Fresh Feel Apparels Versus Union of India (2025) 30 Centax 464 (Del.)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

  • Pratibha M. Singh & Rajneesh Kumar Gupta, JJ.
  • S/Shri Pranay Jain & Karan Singh, Advs. for the Petitioner.
  • Ms Abha Malhotra, Sr. CGSC, Ms Aayushi Thandassery, S/Shri K.G. Gopalakrishnan, Sumit K. Batra & Ms Nisha Mohandas, Advs. for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

The petitioner, a registered assessee, challenged an order of demand issued under Section 73 of the CGST and Delhi GST Act, contending that the adjudicating authority failed to consider its reply to the show cause notice. A show cause notice was issued proposing demand on the basis that the petitioner had availed Input Tax Credit from suppliers whose registrations were cancelled retrospectively. The petitioner submitted a reply to the notice along with supporting documents to establish the genuineness of the transactions. It was contended that despite this submission, the impugned order had been passed without proper application of mind to the reply and evidentiary materials. Accordingly, the matter was placed before the Hon’ble High Court.

High Court Held

The Hon’ble High Court held that the impugned order was detailed in nature and demonstrated due consideration of the petitioner’s reply as well as the supporting documents furnished. The Court observed that the order specifically addressed the issues raised in the reply and did not reflect a mechanical or perfunctory approach. Concluding that there was no violation of principles of natural justice or statutory procedure, the Court declined to exercise writ jurisdiction It was further observed that any grievance against the merits of the order must be pursued through the appellate mechanism prescribed under Section 107 of the CGST and Delhi GST Act.

List of Cases Cited

  • DJST Traders (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India — [2025] 174 taxmann.com 191 (Delhi) — Referred [Para 4]
  • HCC-SEW-MEIL-AAG JV v. Asstt. Commissioner of State Tax — [S.L.P No. 4240 of 2025, dated 21-2-2025] — Referred [Para 14]

List of Notifications Cited

Leave Comment

Your email address will not be published.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

Related Stories
SC Dismisses SLP on Excess Stock Proceedings Under GST

GST • News • Case Chronicles

June 7, 2025

Order Set Aside for Non-Issuance of DRC-01A | HC

GST • News • Case Chronicles

June 7, 2025

Anticipatory Bail Not Maintainable for Bailable ITC Fraud Below ₹5 Cr | HC

GST • News • Case Chronicles

June 6, 2025

Writ Not Maintainable in GST Dispute on Investment Manager’s Expenses | HC

GST • News • Case Chronicles

June 5, 2025

Ground Clearance Norm for Compensation Cess is Prospective from July 2023 | HC

GST • News • Case Chronicles

June 3, 2025

Section 61 Notice Invalid If Based Solely on Market Price Comparison | HC

GST • News • Case Chronicles

June 2, 2025

GST Payable on Development Rights Acquired Post-GST | Patna HC

GST • News • Case Chronicles

May 31, 2025

Leasehold Transfer Not a Supply Under GST | HC

GST • News • Case Chronicles

May 30, 2025

HC Stays Penalty – Section 74 CGST Demand vs Section 73

GST • News • Case Chronicles

May 29, 2025

Leasehold Rights & Buildings Assignment Not GST Supply | HC

GST • News • Case Chronicles

May 29, 2025