Harpal Singh vs. Additional Commissioneradjudication CGST Delhi North And Anr
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
Heard together (2 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
O R D E R %
2026
By way of the present Petitions, the Petitioners pray for the following relief:- “(a) Issue a writ, order, or direction in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or directions to allow the petitioner file appeals dispensing with the requirement of pre- deposit against the Order-in-Original No. 37/ADJ-DGGI-ZU- Gurugram DATED 04.12.2025 passed by the learned Additional Commissioner, CGST Delhi North; and/or 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 05/08/2026 at 12:09:33
(b) pass any other or further order/orders which Your Lordships may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice.”
It has been noticed that the common Impugned Order dated 04.12.2025 has been passed against more than 350 parties. The Competent Authority has, upon, detailed examination of the material placed before it, concluded that the fake Input Tax Credit (‘ITC’) has been claimed on the strength of invoices unsupported by any actual supply of goods or good-less invoices. The aforesaid finding has been rendered upon a comprehensive and reasoned discussion of various relevant factual and legal aspects of the matter.
Admittedly, the Impugned Order is appealable under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (to be read as Act of 2017). Moreover, under the statutory scheme of the Act of 2017, the Appellant Authority has no power to waive the mandatory pre-deposit prescribed under Section 107, and as such, the Petitioner, is required to deposit 10% of the disputed tax demand as a condition precedent for maintaining the Appeal to be filed thereof.
The aforestated position stands categorically recognised by a co-ordinate bench of this Court in W.P. (C) 4662/2025 captioned M/s. Appeal No. 8325/2011 captioned Smt. Har Devi Asnani vs. State of Rajasthan and Others, decided on 27.04.2011. A bare perusal of the aforesaid Order makes it amply evident that same came to be passed in the context of provisions of Rajasthan Stamp Act, 1998. However, the controversy involved in the present case is materially distinct, 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 05/08/2026 at 12:09:33
inasmuch as the issue at hand arises under the provisions of Act of 2017. Consequently, the aforesaid judgment does not advance the case of the Petitioner.
In view of the availability of an efficacious statutory remedy of appeal and the settled legal position governing the requirement of mandatory pre-deposit, this Court is not inclined to entertain the present Petitions in exercise of its extraordinary writ juri iction.
Accordingly, the present Petitions, along with all pending applications, stands disposed of.
A photocopy of the Order passed today be kept in the connected matter.
ANIL KSHETARPAL, J.
SHAIL JAIN, J. JULY 27, 2026/sp/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 05/08/2026 at 12:09:33
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.