Ample Events And Exhibitions Private Limited vs. Sales Tax Officer Class Ii/Avato, Ward 60 & Ors.
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
O R D E R %
2026
Through the present Writ Petition, the Petitioner seeks, inter alia, the following reliefs: “a) A Writ of certiorari under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India quashing/set aside the impugned order dated 24.08.2024 passed by the Respondent No. 1 under Section 73 of the Delhi Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 without application of mind and in gross violation of natural justice; Or/and.
b) Without prejudice, a Writ of certiorari under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India declaring the Notification No. 56/2023 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 17/08/2026 at 12:03:45
dated 28.12.2023 issued by Respondent No. 3 as well as Notification No. 56/2023-State Tax dated 11.07.2024 issued by Respondent No. 4 being violative of Central/Delhi GST Act, 2017 as well as Article 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India;”
In the present Writ Petition, the Petitioner challenges Notification No.56/2023-Central Tax dated 28.12.2023issued under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and Notification No.56/2023-State Tax dated 11.07.2024 issued under the Delhi Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. 3. Learned Counsel representing the parties are ad idem that Notification No.56/2023-Central Tax, extending the period of limitation for opening the case, is presently the subject matter of challenge before the Hon’ble Supreme Court.
It is further admitted by the parties that the Petitioner shall be entitled to the benefit of the judgment that may be rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the aforesaid proceedings, subject to the outcome thereof.
In the present case, the Impugned Order was passed after the Petitioner had submitted a Reply to the Show Cause Notice. However, it is undisputed that the Impugned Order was merely uploaded on the Web Portal and was never otherwise served upon the Petitioner.
The practice of merely uploading Notices and Orders on the Web Portal has been adversely commented upon by the Division Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Luxmi Traders v. Union Territory of Chandigarh &Ors., (2026) 44 Centax 371 (P&H). Paragraph No.60 of the said judgment reads as under:
“60. On the basis of discussions and deliberations 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 17/08/2026 at 12:03:45
aforesaid, we come to the following conclusions: - (i) Service of SCN upon the petitioner/assessee concerned cannot be deemed sufficient merely on account of its uploading on the Common Portal, unless its receipt is acknowledged or a reply is filed. (ii) Where SCN is served only by way of uploading it on the Common Portal and in the absence of reply filed by the petitioner/assessee concerned, ex parte order is passed in original, the proceedings would stand restored to the stage of issuance of SCN and the petitioner would be at liberty to file reply to the SCN within a period of four weeks from today whereafter, the Department shall proceed further after affording required opportunity of hearing. (iii) In cases where the order-in-original is passed after contest and is served only by uploading it on the Common Portal, the period of limitation for filing of appeal would not be triggered, and the assessee aggrieved will have the right to file an appeal within a period of four weeks from today. (iv) Where appeals filed against the order-in-original, which was served only by uploading it on the Common Portal, are dismissed on the ground of limitation, the order of the Appellate Court shall be set aside and the appeal would stand restored to its original number and would be heard and decided on merits. (v) In cases where SCNs were served only on portal and ex parte adjudication order was passed for want of reply of assessee and appeal against the said order was dismissed on the ground of delay, both adjudication order and order- in-appeal shall be set aside and proceedings will be restored at the stage of issuance of SCN and petitioner/assessee shall be at liberty to file reply to SCN within four weeks from today, whereafter, the department shall proceed further after affording due opportunity of hearing.”
Learned Counsel representing the Respondents made an attempt to distinguish the aforesaid judgment. However, this Court is not persuaded by the submissions advanced.
In view of the aforesaid position, the present Writ Petition is 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 17/08/2026 at 12:03:45
disposed of in terms of the principles laid down in Paragraph No.60 of Luxmi Traders(supra). Since the Impugned Order dated 24.08.2024 was passed after the Petitioner had contested the proceedings, the Petitioner shall be at liberty to file an appeal against the said Order within a period of four weeks from today.
The Appellate Authority shall consider the appeal on merits, subject to the Petitioner fulfilling the other statutory requirements for maintaining the appeal.
In view of the aforesaid, the present Writ Petition, along with the pending application, is disposed of.
ANIL KSHETARPAL, J.
HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR, J. AUGUST 12, 2026 Pallavi/Shah
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 17/08/2026 at 12:03:45
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.