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Your email address will not be published.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
GSTN Upgrades GSTR-3B Interest and Tax Reporting from Jan 2026

GST • News • Statutory Scope

February 1, 2026

Common Director Not Ground to Lift Corporate Veil | HC

GST • News • Case Chronicles

January 31, 2026

GST Appeal Allowed Despite Delay Due to Illness | HC

GST • News • Case Chronicles

January 30, 2026

HC Orders Reconsideration of Excess ITC Denial on Imports

GST • News • Case Chronicles

January 30, 2026

Bail Granted After Prolonged Custody Before Trial | SC

GST • News • Case Chronicles

January 29, 2026

Refund Cannot Be Rejected After Eligibility Accepted | HC

GST • News • Case Chronicles

January 28, 2026

GSTN Advisory On RSP Based Valuation Of Tobacco Under GST

GST • News • Statutory Scope

January 27, 2026

Writ Not Maintainable Against SCN Under GST | SC

GST • News • Case Chronicles

January 24, 2026

Writ Not Maintainable Against SCN Under Section 74 | SC

GST • News • Case Chronicles

January 23, 2026

Refund Of Statutory Pre-Deposit Becomes Vested Right | SC

GST • News • Case Chronicles

January 22, 2026