BharatTaxGST

Expo Freight Private Limited vs. Union Of INDIA & Ors.

Original PDF →
W.P.(C)/11147/2026HC DelhiGSTCNR DLHC01035865202606 August 2026Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHAIL JAIN,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL2 pages
For Petitioner: Mr. Prakash Shah, Sr. Adv. along with Mr. Mihir Deshmukh, Mr. Shamik Gupte and Mr. Shaantaanu Nair, AdvsFor Respondent: Ms. Avshreya Rudy, SPC along with Mr. Kartik Sharma, GP. Mr. Gibran Naushad, SSC along with Mr. Suraj Shekhar Singh, Mr. Hasan Haider and Mr. Anish Mishra, Advs

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
$~101 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010358652026 + W.P.(C) 11147/2026 and CM APPL. 51570/2026 EXPO FREIGHT PRIVATE LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Prakash Shah, Sr. Adv. along with Mr. Mihir Deshmukh, Mr. Shamik Gupte and Mr. Shaantaanu Nair, Advs. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Ms. Avshreya Rudy, SPC along with Mr. Kartik Sharma, GP. Mr. Gibran Naushad, SSC along with Mr. Suraj Shekhar Singh, Mr. Hasan Haider and Mr. Anish Mishra, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SHAIL JAIN

O R D E R % 06.08.2026

1.

Admittedly, the Petitioner has a statutory alternative remedy of filing an Appeal before the Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (‘GSTAT’), which is now operational.

2.

Learned senior counsel representing the Petitioner submits that various other States have already sanctioned refund of accumulated ITC, whereas by the Impugned Order dated 19.01.2026, a contrary view has been taken. It is further submitted that this Court should interfere in the matter in exercise of its writ juri iction.

3.

This Court has considered the submissions and is of the opinion that once a statutory alternative remedy is available, interference in 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 10/08/2026 at 11:46:52

exercise of judicial review should not to be resorted to, except in exceptional circumstances, none of which are made out in the present case.

4.

In these circumstances, the present Writ Petition, along with the pending application, is disposed of while relegating the Petitioner to the statutory alternative remedy. It is needless to observe that if the Petitioner files an application under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963, seeking exclusion of the period during which the present Writ Petition remained pending, the same shall be considered by the GSTAT in accordance with law.

5.

Learned senior counsel representing the Petitioner has also advanced various other submissions on the merits of the controversy. Needless to state, all such submissions shall remain open to be urged before the GSTAT. ANIL KSHETARPAL, J. SHAIL JAIN, J. AUGUST 06, 2026 s.godara/shah 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 10/08/2026 at 11:46:52

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.