Anurag Dalmia Vs Additional Director General (Adjudication)

¶1

$~10 to 12 & 42

¶2

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

+ W.P.(C) 4454/2025& CM APPL. 25600/2025

¶4

ANURAG DALMIA .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Sujatha N. Shirolkar, Adv. versus

¶5

ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL (ADJUDICATION) .....Respondent Through: Ms. Shreya Lamba, Mr. RitvikSaha and Mr. Akhil, Advs. for Mr. Aditya Singla, SSC, CBIC. 11 WITH

¶6

W.P.(C) 8301/2025

¶7

ANURAG DALMIA .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Sujatha N. Shirolkar, Adv. versus ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL (ADJ) .....Respondent Through: Ms. Shreya Lamba, Mr. RitvikSaha and Mr. Akhil, Advs. for Mr. Aditya Singla, SSC, CBIC.

¶8

12 WITH + W.P.(C) 9017/2025

¶9

ANURAG DALMIA .....Petitioner

¶10

Through: Ms. Sujatha N. Shirolkar, Adv. versus

¶11

ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL (ADJUDICATION) .....Respondent Through: Ms. Shreya Lamba, Mr. RitvikSaha and Mr. Akhil, Advs. for Mr. Aditya Singla, SSC, CBIC.

¶12

This is a digitally signed order.

¶13

W.P.(C) 4454/2025 and connected matters

¶14

Page 1 of 4

¶15

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 26/11/2025 at 11:57:47

¶16

42 AND + W.P.(C) 16325/2025

¶17

ANURAG DALMIA .....Petitioner

¶18

Through: Ms. Sujatha N. Shirolkar, Adv.

¶19

versus ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL (ADJUDICATION)

¶20

.....Respondent Through: Mr. Anurag Ojha, SSC, Mr. Dipak Raj, Mr. Shashank Kr., Ms. Priyatanu Bhardwaj, Advs

¶21

CORAM: JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH JUSTICE SAURABH BANERJEE

¶22

O R D E R % 20.11.2025

¶23

This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

¶24

These are four Petitions filed by the Petitioner-Mr. Anurag Dalmia under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India,who was the ViceChairman of Golden Tobacco Limited (hereinafter, ‘ GTL ’).

¶25

The brief background of the present cases is that adjudication proceedings had commenced against the Petitioner in the year 1995. The allegation was that the Company i.e., M/s. M.P. Tobacco Limited (hereinafter, ‘ MPTL ’)had indulged in evasion of excise through clandestine removal of various Tobacco products.MPTL is stated to be a franchisee of M/s. GTL Industries and was controlled by the said M/s. GTL Industries only. During the course of proceedings, various Show Cause Notices (hereinafter, ‘SCNs’ ) were issued to the Petitioner.

¶26

Thereafter, the said SCNs were adjudicated and the Orders-in-

¶27

W.P.(C) 4454/2025 and connected matters

¶28

Page 2 of 4

¶29

This is a digitally signed order.

¶30

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 26/11/2025 at 11:57:47

¶31

Original (hereinafter, ‘ OIOs ’) were passed by the Department. Various challenges were raised at different stages by the Petitioner, finally, the matter was remanded to the Adjudicating Authority vide orders dated 01^st December, 2014 in W.P.(C) 4454/2025, 13th March, 2002 and 19th December, 2002 in W.P.(C) 8301/2025, 6th March, 2014 in W.P.(C) 9017/2025 and25th November, 2014 in W.P.(C) 16325/2025 by the Customs, Excise And Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter, ‘CESTAT’ ).

¶32

The impugned orders have now been passed by the Directorate General of GST Intelligence on 12^th December, 2024 in W.P.(C) 4454/2025 , on 28th February, 2025 in W.P.(C) 8301/2025, on 29th January, 2025 in W.P.(C) 9017/2025 and on 28th March, 2025 in W.P.(C) 16325/2025 which areappealable orders. 6. The present petitions raised various contentions in respect of violation of principles of natural justice, however, since the impugned orders are appealable, the Petitioner is willing to withdraw the present petitions to avail of his appellate remedies under Section 35B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 to the CESTAT.

¶33

The limitation for filing the appeals has, however, lapsed. Considering the fact that these writ petitions have been pending before this Court since March, 2025, this Court is of the opinion that the Petitionerdeserves to be permitted to approach the CESTAT within a period of two months i.e., by 20^th January, 2026 along with the requisite pre-deposit.

¶34

If the said pre-deposit is made by 20^th January, 2026, and the appeals are filed before the CESTAT by the Petitioner, the said appeals would not be dismissed on the ground of limitation and shall be adjudicated on merits. 9. Needless to add, this Court has not considered the merits of the

¶35

W.P.(C) 4454/2025 and connected matters

¶36

Page 3 of 4

¶37

This is a digitally signed order.

¶38

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 26/11/2025 at 11:57:47

¶39

contentions raised by either side. As such, all contentions are left open for both the parties.

¶40

The petitions, along with pending application(s), if any, are disposed of.

¶41

PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J

¶42

SAURABH BANERJEE, J

¶43

NOVEMBER 20, 2025 /tg/ck

¶44

W.P.(C) 4454/2025 and connected matters

¶45

Page 4 of 4

¶46

This is a digitally signed order.

¶47

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 26/11/2025 at 11:57:47

Anurag Dalmia v. Additional Director General (Adjudication)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anurag Dalmia v. Additional Director General (Adjudication)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Union of India & Ors. Vs Ic 34187K Col Rajnee Kant Verma

Manjeet Singh Vs Union of India & Ors.

Sushil Kumar Gupta Vs New Delhi Municipal Council & Anr.

Dr Ankit Dhankar and Ors. Vs the Medical Counselling Committee and Ors.

Pratap Infotech Network Private Limited through Its Director Sanjay Goel Vs Income Tax Officer, WARD-20(1), Delhi & Ors.

Inder Dev Gupta Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 2

Delhi Laghu Udhyog Manch Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Union of India & Ors. Vs 290808 Ex Mwo Gobinda Chandra Adhikary

Davender Kumar Chadha Pro Liberty Cables (India) Vs Sales Tax Officer Class II Avato Ward 63 and Anr.

Shivay Iron Scrap (through Its Propriter Vs Commissioner of Goods and Service Tax, North

Kumar Enterprises Vs the Principal Commissioner , Delhi GST & Anr.

Navin Road Lines Vs Assistant Registrar Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal

M/S Ashish Foils Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India & Ors.

Vindhya Telelinks Limited and Ors. Vs Mr Abhijit Narendra and Ors.