M/S Shubham Enterprises vs. The Union Of INDIA And Ors
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
Through these two (02) connected Writ Petitions, the Petitioner prays for issuance of a Writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the orders dated 16.02.2026 and 05.12.2025 passed by the Competent Authority under Section 74 of the Central Goods and Services Tax 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 20/08/2026 at 11:23:27
Act, 2017 [hereinafter referred to as „CGST Act‟].
The Petitioner claims that these above-mentioned orders have been passed ex parte on the basis of Notices uploaded on the common web-portal. While referring to the judgment passed by the Division Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Luxmi Traders v. Union Territory of Chandigarh and Others; (2026) 44 CENTAX 371 (P&H), learned counsel representing the Petitioner submits that the orders dated 16.02.2026 and 05.12.2025 ought to be set aside and the Petitioner be granted an opportunity of personal hearing.
Per contra, learned counsel representing the Respondent has produced copies of screenshots indicating that the Petitioner was sent Show Cause Notices („SCNs‟) as well as personal hearing Notice through post as well as to its registered e-mail address.
The judgment passed in Luxmi Traders (supra), the Division Bench was concerned with cases where the notices/orders had been served only by uploading them on the common portal.
In the present case, however, the Respondents have contended and placed material before this Court to show that, apart from uploading the notices on the common portal, the SCNs as well as notices for personal hearing were also sent through post and at the registered e-mail address of the Petitioner. The factual position in the present case is, therefore, distinguishable from that considered in Luxmi Traders (supra).
Admittedly, the Petitioner has a statutory remedy of Appeal against the respective impugned orders dated 05.12.2025 and 16.02.2026. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Court does not consider it appropriate to exercise its writ juri iction.
Accordingly, the Petitioner is relegated to the statutory remedy 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 20/08/2026 at 11:23:27
of Appeal.
With these observations, the present Writ Petitions are disposed of.
A photocopy of the order passed today be kept in the connected matter.
ANIL KSHETARPAL, J.
SHAIL JAIN, J. AUGUST 18, 2026 s.godara/ad
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 20/08/2026 at 11:23:27
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.