Retrovis Fashion PVT. LTD vs. Additional Director, Dggi & Ors.
Facts
The petitioner, Retrovis Fashion Pvt. Ltd., filed a writ petition challenging a final order of assessment passed by the respondents on September 27, 2024. The petitioner argued that the Show Cause Notice (SCN) was issued by an unauthorized authority, citing Circular No. 31/05/2018-GST. Additionally, the petitioner contended that the Relied Upon Documents (RUDs) mentioned in the SCN were neither uploaded nor provided. The respondents, including the Additional Director, DGGI, argued that the assessing authority was empowered by the circular and that the petitioner's assertion regarding RUDs lacked proper verification in their affidavit.
Held
The Court held that the writ petition was not maintainable on either of the grounds raised. Regarding the first issue, the Court found that the Circular dated February 9, 2018, identified authorities for adjudication, and the Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, who passed the final order, was duly recognized. The Court stated that the SCN being issued by a different authority did not invalidate the final order passed by the competent authority. Concerning the second issue, the Court noted that the petitioner's affidavit, which contained the assertion about non-provision of RUDs, was not properly verified, and the other paragraphs were based on legal advice. The Court found no justification to accept this assertion. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed, but without prejudice to the petitioner's right to institute appropriate statutory proceedings against the impugned order. The Court also left open the possibility for the petitioner to request the supply of RUDs from the respondents.
Key Issues
1. Whether the Show Cause Notice (SCN) was issued by an authority not empowered under Circular No. 31/05/2018-GST, rendering the subsequent assessment order invalid? The petitioner argued that the issuing authority lacked proper authorization as per the mentioned circular. The respondents contended that the final order was passed by a competent authority recognized by the circular, and the SCN's issuing authority being different did not invalidate the final order. 2. Whether the Relied Upon Documents (RUDs) mentioned in the SCN were not provided to the petitioner, thus violating principles of natural justice and vitiating the assessment order? The petitioner asserted that the RUDs were neither uploaded nor provided. The respondents countered that the petitioner's affidavit lacked proper verification for this claim, and the averments were based on legal advice.
Sections Cited
Section 75(4)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
O R D E R %
2025
The writ petitioner impugns the order dated 27 September 2024 in terms of which the respondents have proceeded to pass a final order of assessment.
Before us there were two principal submissions which were addressed. It was firstly averred that the Show Cause Notice [„SCN‟] which preceded the passing of the order impugned had been issued by an authority which was clearly not empowered or authorized in light of Circular No. 31/05/2018-GST dated 09 February 2018 which has been enclosed as Annexure P4. The second argument was that Relied Upon Documents [“RUD”] which were mentioned in the SCN as Annexure-A, were neither uploaded nor provided to the writ petitioner.
We find ourselves unable
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Delhi High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.