Disposed

Ms Jamil Trading Co. Thrg Proprietor Mr Jamil Ahmed v. Union of India Thrg the Secretary Ministry of Finance & Ors.

Delhi HC26 Nov 2025W.P.(C)/10513/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

GST taxpayer challenged an Order-in-Original confirming tax demand and Order-in-Appeal passed without a proper personal hearing; the appellate hearing notice fixed a date after the order was passed. The Court set aside the OIA, condoned delay in filing the appeal, and directed a fresh personal hearing and merits decision on appeal.

What did the court decide?

Impugned OIA set aside; delay in filing appeal condoned; fresh personal hearing directed with appeal to be decided afresh on merits.

Ms Jamil Trading Co. Thrg Proprietor Mr Jamil Ahmed Vs… — GST and Indirect Tax | Delhi HC (2025)

¶1

$~62

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: 26^th November, 2025 Uploaded on: 1^st December, 2025

¶3

W.P.(C) 10513/2025 & CM APPL. 43625/2025 MS JAMIL TRADING CO THRG PROPRIETOR MR JAMIL AHMED .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Satendra Kumar and Mr. Pragyanshu Pandey, Advs. (M9696343513)

¶4

versus

¶5

UNION OF INDIA THRG THE SECRETARY MINISTRY OF FINANCE & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Shashank Sharma, SSC with Ms. Malika Kumari, Adv. for R-3.

¶6

CORAM: JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH JUSTICE RENU BHATNAGAR

¶7

JUDGMENT

¶8

Prathiba M. Singh, J.

¶9

This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

¶10

This matter is being taken up today, as 25th November 2025 was declared a holiday on account of ‘Guru Tegh Bahadur’s Martyrdom Day’.

¶11

The present petition has been filed by the Petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, inter alia , challenging the impugned Order-inOriginal dated 23^rd August, 2024 (hereinafter, impugned ‘OIO’) as also the impugned Order-in-Appeal dated 16^th April, 2025 (hereinafter, ‘impugned OIA’) .

¶12

A brief background of the Petitioner’s case is that, a Show Cause Notice dated 31st May, 2024 (hereinafter, ‘SCN’) was issued to the Petitioner under Section 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, (hereinafter, ‘CGST

¶13

Signature Not Verified

¶14

Page 1 of 4

¶15

W.P.(C) 10513/2025

¶16

Digitally Signed By:DHIRENDER KUMAR Signing Dat e:0 1.12.2025 18:03:00

¶17

Act’) in which additional tax demands and demands relating to ineligible ITC were raised against the Petitioner. However, no reply was filed by the Petitioner to the SCN.

¶18

The grievance of the Petitioner is that the time given to file the reply was only 5 days and thereafter, the impugned OIO was passed on 23^rd August, 2024 itself i.e , within a period of one week after the issuance of the SCN. 6. In terms of the impugned OIO, tax demand of Rs. 3,36,42,865/- was confirmed against the Petitioner. Thereafter, an appeal was filed by the Petitioner on 21^st December, 2024 and a notice of personal hearing was served upon the Petitioner on 29^th April, 2024 for a hearing on 30^th April, 2024. The said notice strangely stated as under:

¶19

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DHIRENDER KUMAR Signing Dat e:0 1.12.2025 18:03:00

¶20

Page 2 of 4

¶21

W.P.(C) 10513/2025

¶22

Thereafter, the impugned OIA was passed on 16^th April, 2024 i .e. , prior to the date fixed for personal hearing.

¶23

Thus, the Petitioner was not afforded a proper opportunity of personal hearing in the appeal.

¶24

The Petitioner had also made a pre-deposit before the Commissioner (Appeals).

¶25

Mr. Sharma, ld. Counsel for the Respondents submits that the Petitioner already has a remedy to approach the GSTAT. 11. In the opinion of this Court, on both the occasions i.e., in the impugned OIO as also in the impugned OIA, sufficient opportunity for personal hearing has not been granted to the Petitioner

¶26

Moreover, the personal hearing notice is also quite strange to say the least that no personal hearing was granted before the Commissioner Appeals but a hearing was fixed for uploading of the order. Such a practice is inexplicable and deserves to be re-looked at as no useful purpose is served by giving a personal hearing for the purpose of uploading an order.

¶27

In the appeal, the Petitioner ought to have been afforded a personal hearing.

¶28

Accordingly, the impugned OIA is set aside. The delay, if any, in filing the appeal, is condoned.

¶29

The Petitioner shall be served a personal hearing notice on the following email address and mobile number:

¶30

Email: [email protected]

¶31

Mobile: 9696343513

¶32

Upon the service of the personal hearing notice and after hearing the

¶33

Signature Not Verified

¶34

Page 3 of 4

¶35

W.P.(C) 10513/2025

¶36

Digitally Signed By:DHIRENDER KUMAR Signing Dat e:0 1.12.2025 18:03:00

¶37

Petitioner, the appeal shall be decided on merits and in accordance with law.

¶38

All rights and remedies of the parties are left open.

¶39

The petition is disposed of in these terms. Pending applications, if any,

¶40

are also disposed of.

¶41

PRATHIBA M. SINGH JUDGE

¶42

RENU BHATNAGAR JUDGE

¶43

NOVEMBER 26, 2025

¶44

dj/ sm

¶45

Signature Not Verified

¶46

Page 4 of 4

¶47

W.P.(C) 10513/2025

¶48

Digitally Signed By:DHIRENDER KUMAR Signing Dat e:0 1.12.2025 18:03:00

Ms Jamil Trading Co. Thrg Proprietor Mr Jamil Ahmed v. Union of India Thrg the Secretary Ministry of Finance & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ms Jamil Trading Co. Thrg Proprietor Mr Jamil Ahmed v. Union of India Thrg the Secretary Ministry of Finance & Ors.

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

Jindal Steel Limited Vs Union of India & Anr.

Delhi Police through Commissioner of Police and Ors. Vs Ravi Dutt Hc Ex in Delhi Police

Cheeli J Ratnam Vs Union of India & Ors.

Khandelwal Laboratories Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India & Anr.

Vipin Automobiles Private Limited Vs Income Tax Officer & Anr.

Anju Khosla Vs Income Tax Officer Ward 15 1 Delhi & Anr.

Mahendra Pal Sharma Vs Directorate of Education Delh & Anr.

Kamal Kalra & Anr. Vs Union of India & Ors.

M/S Kuber Enterprises Vs the Principal Commissioner, Delhi GST

India Steel through Its Proprietor, Anis Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Gurveer Kaur & Anr. Vs the Commissioner of Customs

M/S Puneet Chemicals Vs Union of India & Anr.

Roovi Vs Commissioner of Customs

Chetan Jain Vs Commissioner of Customs & Ors.