Judgment
$~45 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010303732025 + W.P.(C) 6558/2025 M/S SINGH EXPORTS THROUGH ITS PROP. MR.AVTAR SINGH .....Petitioner Through:
Mr. Sholab Arora & Ms.
Madhumitha Kesavan, Advs.
versus ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, DIVISION GANDHI NAGAR, COMMISSIONERATE DELHI EAST, CENTRAL TAX .....Respondent Through:
Mr. Akash Verma, SSC with Ms. Aanchal Uppal, Adv.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SHAIL JAIN O R D E R %
15.09.2026 1.
The present writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 6th March, 2025 (hereinafter, 'the impugned order') passed by the Assistant Commissioner of GST East, Central Tax, by which the application filed by the Petitioner seeking refund of IGST paid on the export of certain consignments has been rejected on various grounds.
2.
Admittedly, the petitioner has a remedy of appeal against the impugned order. However, learned counsel representing the petitioner contends that while passing the impugned order, the Adjudicatory Authority has traveled beyond the Show Cause Notice(hereinafter ‘SCN’).
3.
It is submitted by the petitioner that in the subsequent physical verification conducted by the Respondent, the petitioner firm was found to exist. Per contra, vide Counter Affidavit filed by the This is a digitally signed order.
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 17/09/2026 at 12:08:45
respondent, wherein physical verification report dated 15.05.2025(subsequent verification) has been attached, the report mentioned that on a physical verification, the shop was found closed.
4.
In this case, the Adjudicating Authority has found an unusual high utilization of Input Tax Credit. Initially search was conducted on 02.01.2025 when the petitioner firm was found non-existent. The petitioner also made a prayer for refund which was rejected vide the impugned order. The petitioner also had applied for revocation of the cancellation of its GST Registration.
5.
The petitioner was sent SCN, however he failed to submit a reply to the same. Since, highly disputed questions of fact are involved in the present case therefore, it would not be fit for this Court to adjudicate this matter.
6.
Hence, the petitioner if so advised, may avail the remedy of appeal under the GST Act, 2017.
7.
It is further noted that, if the petitioner files appeals within the next 15 days, the same shall be decided on merits and shall not be rejected on limitation.
8.
In view of the above, the Writ stands disposed of.
ANIL KSHETARPAL, J.
SHAIL JAIN, J.
SEPTEMBER 15, 2026/NG/HP This is a digitally signed order.
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 17/09/2026 at 12:08:45