M/S. Hazari Bagh Builders PVT.LTD. vs. Union Of INDIA

Held

The Court noted that the petitioners had already filed replies to the show cause notices issued under Section 73 of the CGST Act, 2017, and adjudication had been completed. The Court acknowledged that a statutory remedy of appeal is available under Section 107 of the DGST Act, SGST Act, and CGST Act. Therefore, the Court decided not to interfere with the impugned orders on their merits. However, the Court highlighted that the question of the validity of notifications issued under Section 168A of the CGST Act, 2017, and the provisions of Section 168 itself, are pending scrutiny before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (C) No.4240/2025. The Court left it open to the petitioners to make submissions before the Apex Court or await its final adjudication. The validity of the impugned orders concerning Section 168A would be governed by the Supreme Court's decision. The Court also referred to a similar view taken by the Delhi High Court. The petitioners were granted liberty to challenge the orders on merit in appeal, and if an appeal was preferred within one month, it would be examined purely on merits without considering the limitation period.

Facts

The petitioners, including Eagle Trans Shipping And Logistics India Private Limited, M/s Khetan Exports, M/s Dharampal Premchand Ltd., M/s Sojitz Corporation, M/s New India Contractors And Developers Pvt. Ltd., Indus Towers Limited, M/s Rakesh Sons, and M/s. Hazari Bagh Builders Pvt.ltd., filed multiple writ petitions before the Rajasthan High Court. These petitions challenged various orders and actions related to Goods and Services Tax (GST). The core of the dispute involved show cause notices issued under Section 73 of the CGST Act, 2017, and subsequent adjudications. The petitioners had already filed replies to these notices and undergone adjudication proceedings. The amount in dispute is not specified in the judgment. The procedural history indicates that the petitioners are seeking relief from the High Court against these GST-related actions.

Key Issues

1. Whether the show cause notices issued under Section 73 of the CGST Act, 2017, and the subsequent adjudications are valid, considering the petitioners have already filed replies and undergone adjudication? 2. What is the validity of notifications issued under Section 168A of the CGST Act, 2017, and the provisions of Section 168 itself? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioners contended that they had already participated in the adjudication process by filing replies to the show cause notices. They also raised concerns regarding the validity of notifications issued under Section 168A of the CGST Act, 2017, and the provisions of Section 168. They sought intervention from the High Court on these matters. Revenue's arguments: The judgment does not explicitly record arguments made by the revenue or state respondents. However, their participation implies a defense of the impugned orders and actions.