M/S Sam Ventures Through Its Proprietor vs. Assistant Commissioner, CGST Badli Division, CGST Delhi North
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, M/s Sam Ventures, is challenging an Order-in-Appeal dated April 22, 2024, passed by the Assistant Commissioner, CGST Badli Division, CGST Delhi North. The petitioner's primary contention is that the appellate authority failed to adhere to the principles of natural justice, as they were neither notified of the appeal filed by the respondent nor apprised of its pendency. The respondent, in its defense, submitted that summons were issued to the petitioner, who failed to appear, and also relied on an email communication. However, the petitioner argued that the summons dispatch was not duly established, and the email was sent to an incorrect address, not the one registered on the GST Network.
Held
The Court held that the Appellate Authority failed to comply with the principles of natural justice. The Court found that the respondent failed to establish the due dispatch of the summons issued to the writ petitioner. Crucially, the Court noted that the email communication relied upon by the respondent was not sent to the registered email address of the petitioner as recorded on the GST Network, which was 'skpllb2@gmail.com'. On this ground alone, the Court found the order of the Appellate Authority to be unsustainable. The Court allowed the writ petition, quashed the order dated April 22, 2024, and revived the appeal before the Appellate Authority to be heard afresh in accordance with the law. All rights and contentions of the parties on merits were kept open.
Key Issues
1. Whether the Appellate Authority complied with the principles of natural justice in passing the Order-in-Appeal dated April 22, 2024, particularly concerning the notification of the appeal to the petitioner and the validity of the service of summons and email communication (turning on principles of natural justice and procedural fairness). Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner argued that they were not notified of the appeal filed by the respondent and were not made aware of its pendency. They contended that the recital in the impugned order, stating they were put on notice, was incorrect. Furthermore, the petitioner asserted that the summons allegedly issued by the respondent was not duly dispatched, and the email communication was sent to an incorrect email address, not their registered email address as per the GSTN portal. Respondent's Arguments: The respondent contended that summons were issued to the writ petitioner, and despite service, the petitioner chose not to appear. They also relied on an email communication sent to 'samventures497@gmail.com'. The respondent's defense was based on a tabular statement of summons sent by the Commissioner (Appeals) office.
Sections Cited
None explicitly mentioned as being discussed or relied upon in the judgment, other than general principles of natural justice and procedural fairness.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
O R D E R
The writ petitioner is aggrieved by the Order-in-Appeal dated 22 April 2024. The principal ground on which the said order is assailed is an abject failure on the part of the respondent/appellate authority to comply with the principles of natural justice.
Learned counsel for the writ petitioner submits that notwithstanding the challenge which stands raised to the review order passed by the Principal Commissioner, Central Goods and Service Tax1
1 CGST , the Appellate Authority has proceeded on the premise that the writ petitioner had been duly placed on notice with respect to the appeal preferred by the respondent. It has been categorically averred in the writ petition that the petitioner was neither placed on notice by 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 18:25:34 the Appellate Authority nor apprised of the pendency of the aforesaid appeal. It is in the aforesaid backdrop that the petitioner questions the recital appearing in Para 4 of the order impugned before us.
Pursuant to the notice issued, the respondent has filed a counter affidavit and on the basis of which it is sought to be contended that the Appellate Authority had, in fact, issued summons to the writ petitioner and despite service thereof, it chose not to appear. They also rely upon an email communication which is stated to have been addressed to “samventures497@gmail.com”. Although the respondent has placed on the record at Annexure R-1 with that affidavit what is stated to be a summon dated 31 August 2023, we find that there has been a complete failure on its part to establish that the aforesaid summons had been duly dispatched.
We find that the entire defense of the respondent is based on a tabular statement drawn by the Office of the Commissioner (Appeals) which attempts to capture details of summons sent. What, however, needs to be borne in consideration is a failure on the part of the respondent to either place for our consideration a certificate issued by the Speed-Post authorities or a tracking report which may have indicated service of the summons upon the writ petitioner.
Insofar as the email communication is concerned, learned counsel for the appellant has drawn our attention to the particulars of the assessee as captured and recorded on the Goods and Services Tax Network2 “Email Id: skpllb2@gmail.com” portal and where its email address has been mentioned as follows: -
2 GSTN 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 18:25:34 6. It is thus ex facie apparent that the email communication was also not sent to the registered email address of the writ petitioner. Consequently, and on this short ground alone, the order of the Appellate Authority is rendered unsustainable.
We accordingly allow the instant writ petition and quash the order dated 22 April 2024. The appeal shall consequently stand revived on the board of the Appellate Authority to be heard afresh and in accordance with the law.
All rights and contentions of respective parties on merits are kept open.
YASHWANT VARMA, J.
HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR, J. FEBRUARY 18, 2025/DR
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 18:25:34
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.