M/S Alfa Enterprises vs. The Principal C0Mmissioner & Anr.
Original PDF →Facts
The Petitioner, M/s Alfa Enterprises, filed a writ petition challenging a Show Cause Notice (SCN) dated January 23, 2025, issued by the Respondent-CGST Department. The SCN proposed to cancel the Petitioner's GST registration on the grounds that the firm was found to be non-functional during an investigation. The Petitioner filed a reply to the SCN on February 3, 2025, but no decision had been taken. The Petitioner also requested a fresh inspection of its premises, citing a precedent from a similar case. The Court considered the matter and opined that the request for re-inspection could be made to the Adjudicating Authority.
Held
The Court held that the request for a fresh inspection of the Petitioner's premises could be made to the Adjudicating Authority, and therefore, the Court was not inclined to quash the impugned Show Cause Notice on this ground. Regarding the Petitioner's prayer for a personal hearing and expeditious conclusion of proceedings, the Court directed the Respondent-Department to grant the Petitioner a personal hearing. The notice for the hearing was to be issued to the Petitioner's provided mobile number and email address. Furthermore, the Respondent-Department was directed to conclude the proceedings initiated by the impugned SCN within a period of three months. The petition was disposed of in terms of these directions.
Key Issues
1. Whether the Petitioner is entitled to a fresh inspection of its premises in light of the ongoing proceedings for cancellation of registration? (Question of fact and law, concerning principles of natural justice and procedural fairness). 2. Whether the Respondent-Department should be directed to grant the Petitioner a personal hearing and conclude the proceedings expeditiously? (Question of law, concerning the right to be heard and timely resolution of disputes). Petitioner's Arguments: The Petitioner argued for a fresh inspection of its premises, relying on the High Court's decision in 'M/s V S Enterprises vs. The Commissioner DGST & Anr' (W.P.(C) 7019/2025), which directed re-inspection. The Petitioner also contended that its business had come to a standstill due to the SCN and sought a personal hearing and time-bound conclusion of proceedings. Revenue's Arguments: The judgment records no specific arguments from the Respondent-Department regarding the re-inspection. However, the Court's observation that the request for re-inspection can be made to the Adjudicating Authority implies that the Court did not find it necessary to direct it at this stage.
Sections Cited
Not specified in the judgment
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
O R D E R % 30.05.2025
This hearing has been done through hybrid mode. CM APPL. 35645/2025, CM APPL. 35646/2025 (for exemptions)
Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Applications are disposed of. W.P.(C) 8149/2025 & CM APPL. 35647/2025
The present petition has been filed by the Petitioner under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India inter alia challenging the Show Cause Notice dated 23rd January, 2025 (hereinafter ‘impugned SCN’) vide which the Respondent-CGST Department (hereinafter ‘Department’) has sought to cancel the registration with effect from 23rd January, 2025. The impugned SCN has been issued on the ground that the Petitioner-firm was found to be non-functional during the investigation.
Reply has been filed by the Petitioner on 3rd February, 2025. However, the decision in the Show Cause Notice has not been taken.
The Petitioner also prays that there may be a fresh inspection of the 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 01/07/2025 at 22:20:31
premises. He relies on a decision of this Court in a similar matter being, W.P. (C) 7019/2025 titled ‘M/s V S Enterprises vs. The Commissioner DGST & Anr’, wherein re-inspection of the premises of the Petitioner therein was directed.
Heard. The Court has considered the matter, and is of the opinion that the request for re-inspection can also be made to the Adjudicating Authority. In view thereof, this Court is not inclined to quash the impugned SCN.
At this stage, the Petitioner prays that the Respondent-Department provide the Petitioner a personal hearing and conclude the proceeding in a time bound manner, as the Petitioner’s firm has come to a standstill, in view of the suspension initiated vide the impugned SCN.
In view of the above submission, the Respondent-Department is directed to grant the Petitioner a personal hearing and the notice for the same may be issued to the Petitioner at the following mobile number and email address: ●Mob. 9871191293 ●Email: attorney.manish@gmail.com
Further, the Respondent-Department shall conclude the impugned SCN proceedings within a period of three months.
Petition is disposed of in these terms. All pending applications, if any, are also disposed of. PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J. RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTA, J. MAY 30, 2025 Rahul/Ar. 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 01/07/2025 at 22:20:31
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.