Disposed

M/S Modi Packers (through Its Sole Proprietor, Sh. Mohit Modi) v. Superintendent, Ward 63 (Range - 43) & Ors.

Delhi HC15 Dec 2025W.P.(C)/16684/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Proprietary concern challenged retrospective cancellation of its GST registration; the show cause notice did not contemplate retrospective cancellation and the order ignored the reply to the SCN. Court set aside the cancellation order, restored the GST registration, and directed filing of returns with late fees and portal access.

What did the court decide?

Cancellation order set aside; GST registration restored with portal access within one week; returns to be filed by 15 January 2026 with late fees/penalty.

M/S Modi Packers (through Its Sole Proprietor, Sh. Mohit… — GST and Indirect Tax | Delhi HC (2025)

¶1

$~48

¶2

I� THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT �EW DELHI Date of decision: 15^th December, 2025 Uploaded on: 16^th December, 2025

¶3

+ W.P.(C) 16684/2025 & CM APPL. 68463/2025 M/S MODI PACKERS (THROUGH ITS SOLE PROPRIETOR, SH. MOHIT MODI) .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Nitin Gulati and Ms. Reena Gandhi, Advs.

¶4

versus SUPERINTENDENT, WARD 63 (RANGE - 43) & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Ms. Anushree Narain, SSC with Mr. Naman Choula and Mr. Yamit Jetley, Advs.

¶5

CORAM: JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SI�GH JUSTICE SHAIL JAI�

¶6

Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)

¶7

This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

¶8

The Petitioner has filed the present petition challenging the order-inappeal dated 9th June, 2025 by which the appeal filed by the Petitioner challenging the order-in-original dated 27th May, 2023 has been dismissed on the ground of limitation.

¶9

The crux of the dispute is that the Petitioner raised a challenge to the order of retrospective cancellation of its GST registration dated 27th May, 2023. The said challenge was dismissed by the appellate authority solely on the ground that the appeal was barred by limitation.

¶10

The background of the case is that the Petitioner obtained his GST registration certificate, registered with effect from 1^st July, 2017, under the name M/s Modi Packers- a sole proprietary concern of Mr. Mohit Modi.

¶11

A show cause notice was issued to the Petitioner on 5^th April, 2023

¶12

Signature Not Verified

¶13

W.P.(C) 16684/2025 Page 1 of 4

¶14

Signed By:TANISHKA GUPTA Signing Da te:1 6.12.2025 15:51:15

¶15

(hereinafter, ‘the SCN’) calling upon the Petitioner to show cause as to why their GST registration ought not to be cancelled on the ground of fraud and wilful mis-statement or suppression of facts .

¶16

The Petitioner filed a reply to the SCN on 12^th April, 2023 and gave the proper registered address of the Petitioner concern, which had been earlier changed. The addresses of the Petitioner are:

¶17

OLD ADDRESS:

¶18

“Ground Floor, Plot No. 154/204, Near Raj Vatika, Village Pooth Khurd, Delhi, North West Delhi, Delhi – 110034”.

¶19

�EW ADDRESS:

¶20

“House No. 75&76, 2^nd Floor, Block F Pkt. 1 Sector 11, New Delhi, North West Delhi, Delhi – 110085.

¶21

In the reply dated 12th April, 2023, filed by the Petitioner to the SCN, the Petitioner provided its operational address, however, no physical inspection was conducted at the new address. Thereafter, the impugned cancellation of GST Registration order was passed on 27^th May, 2023 without giving any reference or consideration to the averments made in the reply filed by the Petitioner to the SCN.

¶22

The order of cancellation dated 27^th May, 2023, in fact, cancelled the GST Registration of the Petitioner retrospectively, i.e. from 3^rd July, 2017.

¶23

Thus, the Petitioner filed an appeal against the said order of cancellation dated 27^th May, 2023, but the same was dismissed on the ground of being barred by limitation.

¶24

It is the case of Mr. Nitin Gulati, ld. Counsel for the Petitioner, that an amended registration certificate had been issuedto the Petitioner, with the new address, on 28^th March, 2023 itself. Despite that, a physical inspection appears to have been conducted at the earlier address of the Petitioner and not at the

¶25

Signature Not Verified

¶26

W.P.(C) 16684/2025 Page 2 of 4

¶27

Signed By:TANISHKA GUPTA Signing Da te:1 6.12.2025 15:51:15

¶28

new address, leading to the order of cancellation dated 27^th May, 2023. On a query from the Court, Mr. Nitin Gulati, ld. Counsel submits that the Petitioner is still in business and wishes to restore the GST registration number and is also willing to file the returns and any late fees/penalty. He further submits that the show cause notice dated 5th April, 2023 which led to the order of cancellation dated 27th May, 2023, did not contemplate retrospective cancellation of the GST registration. However, despite that, the GST Registration of the Petitioner has been cancelled retrospectively.

¶29

Ms. Anushree Narain, ld. Counsel for the Respondent, submits that though the retrospective cancellation of GST Registration of the Petitioner was not contemplated in the SCN, however, there appears to be some lapse in the passing of the reasoned order of cancellation dated 27th May, 2023 and the challenge thereto by the Petitioner in the form of an appeal. 12. The Court has considered the matter. The order of cancellation dated 27th May, 2023 is absolutely silent upon the reasons for retrospective cancellation of the GST Registration of the Petitioner. Moreover, the SCN does not contemplate retrospective cancellation at all. In addition to that, the order of cancellation does not deal with any of the contentions of the Petitioner in the reply filed to the SCN. 13. The retrospective cancellation having not been mentioned in the SCN, the same cannot be given effect retrospectively by way of the impugned order for cancellation. This position has been reiterated by this Court in various decisions including in ‘Subhana Fashion v. Commissioner Delhi Goods and Service Tax (W.P. (C) 12255/2024)’, “M/S Balaji Industries v. The Principal Commissioner CGST Delhi North Commissionerate & Anr. (W.P.(C) 11913/2024)’ and ‘Ridhi Sidhi Enterprises v. Commissioner of Goods & Service Tax (CGST), South Delhi & Anr. (W.P.(C) 8061/2024)’.

¶30

Signature Not Verified

¶31

W.P.(C) 16684/2025 Page 3 of 4

¶32

Signed By:TANISHKA GUPTA Signing Da te:1 6.12.2025 15:51:15

¶33

Under these circumstances, the order of cancellation dated 27th May, 2023 cannot sustain. The impugned cancellation order is accordingly set aside and the GST registration of the Petitioner is restored, in the following terms:

¶34

i. The Petitioner shall be given access to the GST portal within one week.

¶35

ii. By 15^th January, 2026, the Petitioner shall file all its up to date returns along with the late fees, penalty, etc., if any.

¶36

iii. If the Department wishes to take any action against the Petitioner in respect of any other violation, the Department is free to do so.

¶37

iv. The latest contact details of the Petitioner are as under:

¶38

Email ID: [email protected]

¶39

Mobile: 9996449179

¶40

The said contact details shall also be updated by the Petitioner on the GST portal, so that the Department can conduct a fresh inspection, if so required.

¶41

The Petition is disposed of in these terms. Pending applications, if any, are also disposed of.

¶42

PRATHIBA M. SI�GH JUDGE

¶43

SHAIL JAI� JUDGE

¶44

DECEMBER 15, 2025 /kp/ss

¶45

Signature Not Verified

¶46

W.P.(C) 16684/2025 Page 4 of 4

¶47

Signed By:TANISHKA GUPTA Signing Da te:1 6.12.2025 15:51:15

M/S Modi Packers (through Its Sole Proprietor, Sh. Mohit Modi) v. Superintendent, Ward 63 (Range - 43) & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Modi Packers (through Its Sole Proprietor, Sh. Mohit Modi) v. Superintendent, Ward 63 (Range - 43) & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Khemo Devi Public School through Its Administrator Vs Central Board of Secondary Education

Anjuman Muntazim Auqaf Dargha Hazrat Maqdoom Samauddin through Secretary Inam Hasan Vs Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Deepanshu Bansal Vs Government of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Management/Chairman Balvantray Mehta Vidya Bhawan Senior Secondary School and Anr. Vs Anil Kumar Aggarwal and Anr.

I Money Wallet Private Limited through Its Director Vs Sales Tax Officer Class II / Avato, Ward 64, Zone 4 & Anr.

Zakir Hussain & Anr. Vs the North Delhi Municipal Corporation & Ors.

Ak Enterprises Vs UOI and Ors.

Binod Kumar Verma Vs Commissioner of Customs

M/S. Pooja Logistics Limited Vs Additional Commissioner, Cgst AUDIT-1 & Ors.

Mohd. Guddu Vs Ganga Devi and Anr.

M/S J.K. Enterprises through Its Proprietor Sh. Jai Kishan Bansal Vs Superintendent, Delhi North, WARD-24, ZONE-1, Delhi

Asif & Anr. Vs the Commissioner of Customs & Ors.

M S Era Infra Engineering Limited Vs Joint Commissioner Cgst Delhi South Commissionerate & Ors.

Capital Apparels Technology (P) Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Value Added Tax & Anr. & Ors.