BharatTaxGST

M/S Accure Labs Private Limited vs. Union Of INDIA & Ors.

Original PDF →
W.P.(C)/871/2026HC DelhiGSTCNR DLHC01001657202602 September 2026Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHAIL JAIN,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL2 pages
For Petitioner: Mr. Rajat Mittal, Mr. Prateek Gupta, Mr. Subham Kumar, Mr. Priyanshu, AdvsFor Respondent: Mr. Akanksha Gupta, SPC with Mr. Yash Garg, Adv. for UOI. Mr. Akash Verma, SSC-CBIC, with Ms Aanchal Uppal and Mr. Archit Dwivedi, Advs

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
$~62 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010016572026 + W.P.(C) 871/2026, CM APPL. 4287/2026 and CM APPL. 4289/2026 M/S ACCURE LABS PRIVATE LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Rajat Mittal, Mr. Prateek Gupta, Mr. Subham Kumar, Mr. Priyanshu, Advs. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Akanksha Gupta, SPC with Mr. Yash Garg, Adv. for UOI. Mr. Akash Verma, SSC-CBIC, with Ms Aanchal Uppal and Mr. Archit Dwivedi, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SHAIL JAIN (THROUGH VC)

O R D E R %

02.09.

2026

1.

On 31.08.2026, the following order was passed:

“1. Learned counsel representing the Respondents prays for an adjournment to analyse the judgment passed by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in Good Luck India Ltd. v. Union of India, 2026 45 Centax 171 SC.

2.

List on 02.09.2026 in the Supplementary List.”

2.

Learned counsel representing the Respondents do not dispute the fact that the judgment passed by the Supreme Court in Good Luck India Ltd. v. Union of India squarely covers the case of the Petitioner.

3.

It will be noticed here that a demand for recovery of Rs.95,89,677/-, along with applicable interest and penalty, has been 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 07/09/2026 at 14:02:35

imposed vide Order-in-Original dated 29.12.2025 on the basis of Audit Objection concerning applicability of Rule 96(10) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 („CGST Rules‟).

4.

In fact, GST Audit of the records of the Petitioner for the Financial Years 2017-18 and 2022-23 were undertaken and the Petitioner did not contest the Audit Objection Nos.1 to 6. The Petitioner only raised objection with regard to Audit Objection No.7, which was related to applicability of Rule 96(10) of the CGST Rules.

5.

Sub-rule (10) of Rule 96 of the CGST Rules has been omitted by subsequent amendment. The Supreme Court has held that the omission of Sub-rule (10) of Rule 96 will be available to all Petitions which are alive.

6.

Keeping in view the aforesaid position, the present Writ Petition is allowed. The Order-in-Original dated 29.10.2025 is hereby set aside.

7.

The present Writ Petition, along with the pending applications, stands disposed of.

ANIL KSHETARPAL, J.

SHAIL JAIN, J. SEPTEMBER 02, 2026 jai/hr

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 07/09/2026 at 14:02:35

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.