Rajesh Tanwar vs. Commissioner,CGST,Delhi West
Original PDF →Facts
The Petitioner, Rajesh Tanwar, filed a writ petition challenging two Orders-in-Original dated February 1, 2025, and February 4, 2025, passed by the Commissioner, CGST, Delhi West. These orders were based on Show Cause Notices issued by the Directorate General for GST Intelligence (DGGI) on July 31, 2024, proposing demand and recovery of Input Tax Credit (ITC) amounting to Rs. 2,83,56,714/- and Rs. 60,73,541/-. The Petitioner contended that the amount of Rs. 60,73,541/- was duplicated in both notices and that Rs. 1,16,47,808/- had already been deposited by him during the investigation with the GST Department. He sought relief regarding the pre-deposit of the duplicated amount and adjustment of the deposited amount for pre-deposit purposes while filing appeals.
Held
The Court held that the Petitioner would be permitted to prefer appeals against both impugned orders. Regarding the pre-deposit, the Court directed that a pre-deposit of Rs. 2,83,56,714/- shall be paid for the appeal challenging the order dated February 1, 2025. For the second appeal, challenging the order dated February 4, 2025, no pre-deposit shall be paid on the grounds of duplication, acknowledging the Petitioner's contention. Furthermore, the Court allowed the adjustment of the amount of Rs. 1,16,47,808/-, deposited by the Petitioner during the investigation, for the purpose of pre-deposit in filing the appeals. The Petitioner was directed to file both appeals by July 15, 2025, and such appeals, if filed within the stipulated time, shall not be dismissed as being barred by limitation. The Petitioner was also permitted to file appeals physically if online filing proved difficult due to the granted adjustment. The ratio decidendi is that where there is a prima facie case of duplication in demand and a substantial amount has already been deposited during investigation, the appellate authority should consider allowing appeals with adjusted pre-deposit requirements to ensure access to justice.
Key Issues
1. Whether the Petitioner should be permitted to file appeals without making a pre-deposit on the amount of Rs. 60,73,541/-, which is alleged to be duplicated in the Show Cause Notices and the impugned orders, under Section 107 of the CGST Act? 2. Whether the amount of Rs. 1,16,47,808/-, deposited by the Petitioner during the investigation, can be adjusted towards the pre-deposit required for filing appeals under Section 107 of the CGST Act? Petitioner's Arguments: The Petitioner argued that the amount of Rs. 60,73,541/- was erroneously included twice in the demands. He further contended that the amount of Rs. 1,16,47,808/- deposited during the investigation should be allowed to be adjusted against the pre-deposit requirement for filing appeals, thereby reducing the financial burden before the appellate authority. Respondent's Arguments: The judgment records no specific arguments made by the Respondent (Commissioner, CGST, Delhi West). However, the impugned orders themselves indicate that the adjudicating authority found the allegations in the SCNs to be true and held the noticee liable for payment of tax/interest/penalty.
Sections Cited
Section 107
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
O R D E R % 26.05.2025
This hearing has been done through hybrid mode. CM APPL.32589/2025 (for exemption)
Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Application is disposed of. W.P.(C) 7220/2025 & CM APPL.32588/2025 (for interim relief)
The present petition has been filed by the Petitioner- Rajesh Tanwar under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, assailing the two Orders-in-Original bearing reference nos. 69/CGST WEST/GST/SKG/ C/2024-25 dated 01st February, 2025 and 318/CGST WEST/GST/SKG/ C/2024-25 dated 04th February, 2025 respectively (hereinafter ‘impugned orders’).
It is the case of the Petitioner that two Show Cause Notices were issued, by Directorate General for GST Intelligence (hereinafter ‘DGGI’) on 31st July, 2024 proposing the demand and recovery of ITC of the following 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 20:09:02 amounts. ●Rs.2,83,56,714/- ●Rs.60,73,541/-
Replies were filed by the Petitioner. One of the grounds raised in the replies was that the amount of Rs.60,73,541/-, which was shown as being availed from M/s Fortune Graphics Limited, was duplicated in both the notices. Second submission is that an amount of Rs.1,16,47,808/- has been deposited by the Petitioner during investigation with the Respondent - GST Department. Ld. Counsel for the Petitioner thus seeks the following reliefs. (i) That the pre-deposit should not be directed qua the duplicated amount of Rs.60,73,541/-. (ii) Secondly, the amount which has been paid by the Petitioner during the investigation, ought to be permitted to be adjusted for the purpose of pre-deposit while filing the appeal under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Act (hereinafter ‘CGST Act’).
The Court has examined the matter and it is prima facie seen that the amount of Rs. Rs.60,73,541/- is duplicated as captured in the impugned Order-in-Original, which is extracted below: “24.7 M/s. Riva Exports: The noticee has contended that there is duplication of demand and multiple SCNs have been issued in the matter to the notice. In this regard I find that the taxpayer can approach the appropriate forum after discharging the entire liability for appropriation of liability in case the liabilities against noticee are confirmed. Rest of the contention of the noticee are identical to that made by by Sh. Pawan Tanwar and M/s. Ganpati 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 20:09:02 Exports Pvt. Ltd. which I have already discussed in details in preceding paras and found that they have no merit. Therefore, I find that all the allegations levelled in the SCN against the noticees to be true and accordingly they are liable for payment of tax/interest/penalty as outlined in the impugned SCN and I hold accordingly. Further, as requested by the above mentioned noticee for cross examination and inspection of investigation file, I find that it is discretion of adjudicating authority and as I have to decide the cases within a particular time frame, I deny the same due to paucity of time. As for as examination of defence witnesses, I find that the opportunity has already be en provided to the noticees by way of giving opportunity for personal hearing in the matter.”
In view of the above, the following directions are issued. (i) The Petitioner would be permitted to prefer appeals challenging both the orders dated 1st February, 2025 and 4th February, 2025 and a pre-deposit qua the demand of Rs.2,83,56,714/- shall be paid in filing the appeal challenging the impugned order 1st February, 2025. In the second appeal, no pre-deposit shall be paid on the grounds of duplication. (ii) For the purpose of pre-deposit, the amount that is lying with the GST Department, which was deposited by the Petitioner during the course of investigation, can be adjusted in respect of the pre- deposit. (iii) In view of the above, the Petitioner may file both the appeals by 15th July, 2025 seeking adjustment as directed above. 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 20:09:02 appeals, if filed by 15th July, 2025 in terms of this order, shall not be dismissed as being barred by limitation. If online filing is proving difficult due to adjustment, which the Court has granted today, the Petitioner is permitted to file the appeal physically.
The present petition, along with pending application, is disposed of in the above terms. PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J. RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTA, J. MAY 26, 2025/dk/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 20:09:02
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.