Disposed

M/S Mindforce Research Private Limited v. Assistant Commissioner RANGE-135, Cgst Delhi West

Delhi HC8 Oct 2024W.P.(C)/14213/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner's GST registration was suspended pending enquiries after an SCN dated April 2023; despite replies submitted on multiple occasions, respondents failed to conclude proceedings. Court directed disposal of SCN proceedings within three weeks, keeping merits open.

What did the court decide?

Directions to conclude SCN proceedings within three weeks; rights and contentions kept open.

M/S Mindforce Research Private Limited Vs Assistant… — GST and Indirect Tax | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~43

¶2

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 14213/2024

¶4

M/S MINDFORCE RESEARCH PRIVATE LIMITED

¶5

.....Petitioner Through: Mr. Puneet Agrawal, Mr. Yuvraj Singh, Mr. Amrendra Singh, Ms. Shruti Garg, Mr. Chetan Kumar Shukla and Ms. Hemlata Rawat Shukla, Advs.

¶6

versus

¶7

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER RANGE-135, CGST DELHI WEST .....Respondent Through: Mr. Anurag Ojha, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr. Subham Kumar and Mr. Dipak Raj, Advs. Mr.Shubham Tyagi, Sr. Standing Counsel (CBIC) with Ms. Navruti Ojha, Adv. for CBIC

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA

¶10

O R D E R % 08.10.2024

¶11

CM APPL. 59430/2024 (Exemption)

¶12

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

¶13

The application stands disposed of.

¶14

W.P.(C) 14213/2024 & CM APPL. 59429/2024 (Stay the operation of impugned SCN dated 10.04.2023)

¶15

The writ petitioner is aggrieved by the issuance of a Show Cause Notice [“ SCN ”] dated 10 April 2023 and in terms of which pending further enquiries, its registration has been suspended. It is

¶16

This is a digitally signed order.

¶17

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 14/10/2024 at 10:31:24

¶18

alleged that despite a response having been duly submitted on more than one occasion to the aforesaid notice, the respondents have failed to dispose of and conclude those proceedings. As a result thereof, learned counsel for the petitioner submits, that the suspension of registration of the petitioner continues even after the expiry of the period of 30 days within which the statute itself requires the respondents to conclude and dispose of those proceedings. Reference in this respect was made to the provisions contained in Rule 22 of the Central Goods & Services Tax Rules, 2017 [“ Rules ”].

¶19

We note that the petitioner had admittedly and as far back as on 24 April 2023 as well as 22 November 2023 submitted its response to the impugned SCN. This was followed by a reminder which was submitted on 31 May 2024. Despite the above, the petitioner alleges that the respondents have failed to conclude the proceedings. 3. Bearing in mind the statutory obligation which stands placed in terms of Rule 22, we are of the considered opinion that the continued suspension of the registration of the petitioner is clearly unjustified. 4. We, thus, dispose of the writ petition by directing the respondents to examine the replies dated 24 April 2023 and 22 November 2023 already submitted by the writ petitioner and dispose of the SCN proceedings within a period of three weeks from today. 5. All rights and contentions of respective parties on merits are kept open.

¶20

YASHWANT VARMA, J.

¶21

RAVINDER DUDEJA, J.

¶22

OCTOBER 8, 2024/ ns

¶23

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 14/10/2024 at 10:31:24

M/S Mindforce Research Private Limited v. Assistant Commissioner RANGE-135, Cgst Delhi West

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Mindforce Research Private Limited v. Assistant Commissioner RANGE-135, Cgst Delhi West

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sh. Sukhpal Vs Ministry of Home Affairs & Ors.

Pusau Vs State of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Smt Vanitaben Bachubhai Nandola B Ed College & Anr. Vs National Council for Teacher Education & Anr.

Shri Jitender Vs University Ofdelhi & Ors.

Robotech India Private Limited Vs Union of India & Ors.

Cms It Services Private Limited Vs Union of India & Ors.

Satish Sharma Vs MCD & Ors.

Mukesh and Ors. Vs Secreatry Labour Govt of India and Anr.

Sushil Goel Vs Pioneer Corporation

M/S Bathla Motels Pvt. Ltd. Vs the Competent Authority, Land Acquisition/ Adm

Ashirvad Pipes Private Limited Vs Jaquar & Company Private Limited

M/S. Shavex Proprietor Mr. Gaurav Pareek Vs Vertice Global Private Limited & Anr.

Shri Rajiv Tyagi Vs Directorate of Enforcement

Raghav Garg Vs Avato Ward 66 State Goods and Service Tax & Anr.