Dismissed

I and S Communique Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Cgst, Audit-Ii, Delhi & Anr.

Delhi HC29 Jan 2024W.P.(C)/6819/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted an application for condonation of delay, dismissed the main writ petition as withdrawn, and directed the petitioner to file a reply to the show cause notice within 30 days, reserving all contentions including the applicability of the extended limitation period.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted time to file reply to show cause notice within 30 days; writ petition dismissed as withdrawn.

I and S Communique Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Cgst… — GST and Indirect Tax | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~14

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

Judgment delivered on: 29.01.2024

¶4

W.P.(C) 6819/2021 & CM APPL. 21475/2021 & 5109/2024

¶5

I AND S COMMUNIQUE PVT. LTD ..... Petitioner

¶6

versus

¶7

COMMISSIONER OF CGST, AUDIT-II, DELHI & ANR. ..... Respondents

¶8

Advocates who appeared in this case:

¶9

For the Petitioner: Mr. Rajesh Jain, Mr. Virag Tiwari, Mr. Ramashish and Ms. Tanya Saraswat, Advocates. For the Respondent: Mr. Harpreet Singh, Senior Standing Counsel for CBIC

¶10

CORAM:-

¶11

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA

¶12

JUDGMENT

¶13

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)

¶14

CM APPL. 5109/2024 (for condonation of delay)

¶15

For the reasons stated in the application, application is allowed.

¶16

Signature Not Verified

¶17

W.P.(C) 6819/2021 Page 1 of 3

¶18

Digitally Signed By:RASHIM KAPOOR Signing Da te:3 1.01.2024 16:15:08

¶19

Delay is condoned. Counter affidavit is taken on record. Rejoinder is already taken on record.

¶20

W.P.(C) 6819/2021

¶21

Petitioner impugns show cause notice dated 27.04.2021 and contends that the show cause notice is beyond the period of limitation prescribed under Section 73 of the Finance Act, 1994.

¶22

Learned counsel for the respondents raises a preliminary objection with regard to the maintainability of the present petition and submits that the show cause notice has been issued by applying proviso to Section 73(1) and the extended period of limitation has been made applicable. Learned counsel without prejudice submits that this plea could have been raised by the petitioner before the Adjudicating Authority.

¶23

In view of the above objection, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks leave to withdraw the petition reserving the right of the petitioner to raise all pleas permissible in law including the invocation of extended period of limitation before the Adjudicating Authority. He, however, prays that in view of pendency of the present petition, reply to the show cause notice could not be filed and time be granted to file a reply.

¶24

In view of the above, the petition is dismissed as withdrawn reserving the right of the petitioner to take all permissible pleas in law

¶25

Signature Not Verified

¶26

W.P.(C) 6819/2021 Page 2 of 3

¶27

Digitally Signed By:RASHIM KAPOOR Signing Da te:3 1.01.2024 16:15:08

¶28

in response to the show cause notice. Petitioner shall file a reply to the show cause notice within a period of 30 days from today. Thereafter, it would be open to the adjudicating authority to adjudicate the show cause notice including the question of invocation of extended period of limitation in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner, without being influenced by anything stated in this order.

¶29

It is clarified that this Court has neither considered nor commented on the merits and contentions of the either party. All rights and contentions of the parties are reserved. It is further clarified that the time spent in this petition shall not be counted towards the period of limitation prescribed under Section 73(4B) (b) of the Finance Act, 1994.

¶30

Petition is disposed of in the above terms.

¶31

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J

¶32

JANUARY 29, 2024 RAVINDER DUDEJA, J ‘ rs’

¶33

Signature Not Verified

¶34

W.P.(C) 6819/2021 Page 3 of 3

¶35

Digitally Signed By:RASHIM KAPOOR Signing Da te:3 1.01.2024 16:15:08

I and S Communique Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Cgst, Audit-Ii, Delhi & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

I and S Communique Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Cgst, Audit-Ii, Delhi & Anr.

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

Shri Shyam Shikshan Sansthan & Anr. Vs Government of India & Anr.

Prof. S Karan Shiksha Samiti & Anr. Vs Government of India & Anr.

Shri Jangam Jyoti Murugha Rajendra D.Ed. College Vs National Council for Teacher Education & Anr.

Prakash Chand Sharma Vs Union of India & Ors.

Anil Kumar Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi and Ors.

Brijesh Yadav, Deputy Commandant and Ors. Vs Union of India and Ors.

Hotel Excelsior Ltd. Vs New Delhi Municipal Council

Late Sh Rajbir through His Lr Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.

Blue Star Limited Thorugh Authorised Signatory Mr Niranjan Nayak Vs Commissioner of Delhi Value Added Tax & Anr.

Hughes Communication India Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Customs (Import & General) New Delhi

Hughes Network Systems India Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Customs (Import & General) New Delhi

Reema Jain Vs Sales Tax Officer Class Ii/ Avato Ward 60 Zone 4

M/S Console Shipping Services India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India through Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue & Ors.

Savi Leathers Vs Union of India and Ors.