Devansh Wire And Cables Private Limited vs. Joint Commissioner, CGST Delhi - East & Ors.
Original PDF →W.P.(C) 4455/2025
Page 1 of 12
$~32 & 59 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: 11th November, 2025 +
W.P.(C) 4455/2025 & CM APPL. 20589/2025 DEVANSH WIRE AND CABLES PRIVATE LIMITED
.....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Antik Majumder, Adv.
versus
JOINT COMMISSIONER, CGST DELHI - EAST & ORS.
.....Respondents
Through: Mr. Aditya Singla, SSC, CBIC, with
Ms. Arya Suresh Nair, Ms. Shreya
Lamba and Mr. Akhil Sharma, Advs. 59
AND +
W.P.(C) 16884/2025
DEVANSH WIRE AND CABLES PRIVATE LIMITED.....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Antik Majumder, Adv.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ANR.
.....Respondents
Through: Mr. Aditya Singla, SSC, CBIC, with
Ms. Arya Suresh Nair, Ms. Shreya
Lamba and Mr. Akhil Sharma, Advs.
Mr. Izhar Ahmad, SPC for R-1/UOI.
CORAM:
JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH
JUSTICE SHAIL JAIN
JUDGMENT Prathiba M. Singh, J.
This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.
The petition being W.P.(C) 4455/2025 has been filed by the Petitioner – Devansh Wire and Cables Private Limited under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, seeking to set aside the Show Cause Notice dated 30th July, 2021 (hereinafter ‘impugned SCN’) and the Order-in- Signed By:TANISHKA GUPTA Signing Date:15.11.2025 10:41:35 Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 4455/2025
Page 2 of 12
Original dated 1st January, 2025 (hereinafter ‘impugned order’) passed by the Joint Commissioner, CGST Delhi – East under Section 74 of the Central Goods and Services Act, 2017 (hereinafter, ‘CGST Act’).
Further, the petition being W.P.(C) 16884/2025 has been filed by the Petitioner, inter alia, assailing the Provisional Attachment Order dated 21st November, 2023 in Form GST DRC-22 issued by the Commissioner of GST, Delhi-East.
The brief background of the present case is that on the basis of allegations of wrongful availment of Input Tax Credit (hereinafter, ‘ITC’), a Show Cause Notice (hereinafter, ‘SCN’) dated 30th July, 2021 was issued against the Petitioner. The allegation in the said SCN was that Rs.10.70 crores was availed of as ITC by the Petitioner through fictitious firms on bogus invoices without there being actual supply of goods. The said SCN was based upon investigation initiated by the Department against the Petitioner company wherein the Director of the Petitioner company i.e., Mr. Ashish Goyal was, in fact, arrested. He was thereafter granted bail on 18th November, 2020. The Petitioner then filed replies to the SCN on 6th September, 2021 and 12th December, 2023. The impugned order dated 1st January, 2025 was then passed confirming the demand in the following terms: “i) I hereby order to recover ITC of IGST of Rs.26,26,988/- (Twenty-Six Lakhs Twenty-Six Thousand Nine Hundred and Eighty-Eight) from M/s DEVANSH WIRE AND CABLES PRIVATE LIMITED under Section 74(1) of the CGST Act, 2017 along with interest payable thereon under section 50 of the CGST Act, 2017 read with Section 20 of the IGST Act, 2017 and also impose penalty of Rs. 26,26,988/- (Twenty-Six Lakhs Twenty-Six Thousand Nine Hundred and Eighty-Eight) upon M/s DEVANSH WIRE AND CABLES PRIVATE LIMITED under Section 74(1) of the CGST Act, 2017; Signed By:TANISHKA GUPTA Signing Date:15.11.2025 10:41:35 Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 4455/2025
Page 3 of 12
ii) I hereby order to recover ITC of CGST of Rs. 3,86,49,859/- (Three-Crore Eighty-Six Lakhs Forty-Nine Thousand Eight- Hundred and Fifty-Nine only) from M/s DEVANSH WIRE AND CABLES PRIVATE LIMITED under section 74(1) of the CGST Act, 2017 along with interest payable thereon under section 50 of the CGST Act and also impose penalty of Rs. 3,86,49,859/- (Three-Crore Eighty-Six Lakhs Forty-Nine Thousand Eight-Hundred and Fifty-Nine only) upon M/s DEVANSH WIRE AND CABLES PRIVATE LIMITED under Section 74(1) of the CGST Act, 2017;
iii) I hereby order to recover ITC of SGST of Rs. 3,86,49,859/- (Three-Crore Eighty-Six Lakhs Forty-Nine Thousand Eight-Hundred and Fifty-Nine only) from M/s DEVANSH WIRE AND CABLES PRIVATE LIMITED under Section 74(1) of the CGST Act, 2017 along with interest payable thereon under section 50 of the CGST Act and also impose penalty of Rs. 3,86,49,859/- (Three-Crore Eighty-Six Lakhs Forty-Nine Thousand Eight-Hundred and Fifty-Nine only) upon M/s DEVANSH WIRE AND CABLES PRIVATE LIMITED under Section 74(1) of the CGST Act, 2017;
iv) I hereby impose penalty of Rs.50,000/- (Rs.25,000/- each under CGST and SGST Act) upon both Shri Ashish Goyal, Director of M/s Devansh Wire and Cables Private Limited under Section 122(3) of the CGST Act, kjf2017 read with Section 20 of the IGST Act, 2017 in terms of Section 137 of the CGST Act, 2017.”
This impugned order was challenged by the Petitioner in W.P. (C) 4455/2025 on multiple grounds which are recorded below:
“4. The present petition assails the impugned SCN and OIO on multiple grounds, which are as under :- i) Issuance of a consolidated Show Cause Notice for various Financial Years. ii) Non-issuance of Demand under Rule 142 of the Signed By:TANISHKA GUPTA Signing Date:15.11.2025 10:41:35 Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 4455/2025
Page 4 of 12
CGST Rules, 2017 in appropriate years. iii) The demand under Rule 142 being issued for a different Financial Year than the year for which the show cause notice is issued. iv) The Order in Original does not duly address the reply submitted by the Petitioner.”
Thereafter, a counter affidavit was called for from the Department and the same has been filed by Mr. Aditya Singla, ld. SSC for the Respondent.
In the meantime, when the investigation had initially commenced, a Provisional Attachment Order was issued to the Petitioner on 18th November, 2020 which was challenged by the Petitioner before this Court in W.P.(C) 14860/2023 titled ‘M/s Devansh Wire and Cables Private Limited v. Union of India & Anr.’. The said writ petition was disposed of by the Co-ordinate bench of this Court on 16th November, 2023 in the following terms:
“3. The petitioner has filed the present petition impugning an order dated 18.11.2020 (hereafter ‘the impugned order’) passed under Section 83 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereafter ‘the CGST Act’) provisionally attaching the petitioner’s property as well as its bank account
In terms of Section 83 (2) of the CGST Act, an order passed under Section 83(1) of the CGST Act is not operative after expiry of a period of one year. Thus, the impugned order is no longer operative.
The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no fresh order under Section 83(1) of the CGST Act has been passed. The learned counsel for the respondents seeks time to verify the same.
We do not consider the same is necessary as the petitioner’s relief is confined to the impugned order passed under Section 83(1) of the CGST Act. Since the impugned order is not operative by virtue of Section 83(2) of the CGST Act, we consider it apposite to dispose of the present petition by noting the same. Signed By:TANISHKA GUPTA Signing Date:15.11.2025 10:41:35 Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 4455/2025
Page 5 of 12
The concerned bank (Tamilnad Mercantile Bank Ltd.) shall not interdict the operations of the petitioner’s bank account on the basis of the impugned order. The Sub-
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.