M/S Matrix Cellular ( International) Services Limited vs. Union Of INDIA & Ors.

W.P.(C)/5041/2019HC DelhiGSTCNR DLHC01022309201928 November 2019Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA8 pages

For Petitioner: Mr. J.K. Mittal, Mr. Chetan Uppal and Ms. Vandana Mittal, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Mr. Harpreet Singh, Senior Standing Counsel with Ms. Suhani Mathur and Mr. Ankit Singh, Advocates for R-3. Mr. Vinod Diwakar, CGSC with Mr. Sayandeep Pahari, Advocate for R-1

AI SummaryDismissed

Held

The High Court held that the respondents followed the statutory scheme by issuing preliminary notices for inquiry before issuing the substantive show cause notice. The court found no jurisdictional error in the issuance of the show cause notice and deemed it inappropriate to interfere at this stage.

Facts

The petitioner sought to quash a show cause notice issued under Section 73 of the CGST Act, alleging arbitrary and malicious action by the respondent. The petitioner had claimed a significant input tax credit upon transitioning to GST, which the department questioned through several notices.

Key Issues

Whether the show cause notice was issued arbitrarily without considering previous replies, and if the court should interfere at the show cause notice stage.

Sections Cited

Section 73, Section 140(8), Rule 121

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

W.P.(C) 5041/2019 Page 1 of 8 $~42 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 5041/2019 & CM APPL. 22278/2019 M/S MATRIX CELLULAR ( INTERNATIONAL) SERVICES LIMITED ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. J.K. Mittal, Mr. Chetan Uppal and Ms. Vandana Mittal, Advocates. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Harpreet Singh, Senior Standing Counsel with Ms. Suhani Mathur and Mr. Ankit Singh, Advocates for R-3. Mr. Vinod Diwakar, CGSC with Mr. Sayandeep Pahari, Advocate for R-1. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

O R D E R % 28.11.2019

The Petitioner has preferred this petition to seek a declaration with regard to the action of Respondent No. 4 as the Additional Commissioner (Respondent No. 2), being arbitrary and malicious, illegal and motivated, allegedly by deliberate concealment of material facts. Action is sought to be taken against Respondent No. 4 who is impleaded in his personal capacity. The Petitioner seeks quashing of the impugned show cause Nos. 04/2019-20 dated 23.04.2019, issued by the Respondent No.

W.P.(C) 5041/2019 2. The case of the Petitioner is that the Petitioner filed its revised ST-3

The judgment continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free account Sign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

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.