Gagan Deep Singh vs. Commissioner Of Central Goods And Services Tax (CGST), Delhi North
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
O R D E R % 25.08.2025
This hearing has been done through hybrid mode. CM APPL. 52307/2025
Allowed subject to all just exceptions. Accordingly, the application is disposed of.
The present petition has been filed by the Petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, assailing the Order of Rejection of Application for Cancellation dated 6th August, 2025 (hereinafter, ‘impugned order’) passed by the Respondent.
The Petitioner is aggrieved by the impugned order passed on 6th August, 2025. The reason which has been given for rejecting the said application of the Petitioner is as under: 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 27/08/2025 at 13:01:58 “This has reference to your reply filed vide ARN AA070425033715A dated 11/04/2025. The reply has been examined and the same has not been found to be satisfactory for the following reasons:
Others - Taxpayer has not reversed the excess availed ITC of Rs. 7,85,798/- during the years 2020-21, 2023- 24 & 2024-25. They have further not submitted documents in respect of address for future correspondence. Remarks:
Taxpayer has not reversed the excess availed ITC of Rs. 7,85,798/- during the years 2020-21, 2023-24 & 2024-25. They have further not submitted documents in respect of address for future correspondence. Therefore, your application is rejected in accordance with the provisions of the Act.”
On behalf of Mr. Jatin Singh, ld. Counsel for the Respondent, Mr. Shivam Gaur, ld. Counsel appears virtually and seeks time to take instructions.
The question in the present petition is whether any Show Cause Notice (hereinafter, ‘SCN’) has been issued to the Petitioner in respect of excess availment Input Tax Credit (hereinafter, ‘ITC’) of Rs. 7,85,798/-.
Accordingly, let both the Counsels seek instructions in this regard. The Respondent shall also file an affidavit as to whether any SCN was issued to the Petitioner or not by the next date of hearing.
Let the order passed in W.P. (C) No. 10725/2025 titled ‘Gagandeep Singh v. Commissioner of Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST), Delhi North’ also be placed on record by the next date of hearing.
The Petitioner has also not filed on record the reply filed to the notice. The purported reply which the Petitioner has filed is to the objections raised by the CGST Department. 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 27/08/2025 at 13:01:58 10. At this stage, ld. Counsel for the Petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the present Petition and file a separate writ petition placing all the relevant details on record.
Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as sought. PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J. SHAIL JAIN, J. AUGUST 25, 2025/kp/ck 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 27/08/2025 at 13:01:58
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.