M/S Radhey Shyam Enterprises vs. Principal Commissioner Of Department Of Trade And Taxes, Gnctd

Facts

The writ petitioner, M/s Radhey Shyam Enterprises, has approached the Delhi High Court with a grievance concerning the respondent's failure to conclude Show Cause Notice (SCN) proceedings initiated on October 3, 2024. Concurrently, the petitioner's Goods and Services Tax (GST) registration remains suspended. The respondent, represented by the Principal Commissioner of the Department of Trade and Taxes, GNCTD, stated that the SCN proceedings would be finalized and disposed of in accordance with law within two weeks from the date of the order, subject to verification of facts and without prejudice to the merits of the case. The Court recorded and accepted this statement.

Held

The Court disposed of the writ petition based on the statement made by the respondent's counsel. The respondent assured the Court that the Show Cause Notice (SCN) proceedings initiated on October 3, 2024, would be duly finalized and disposed of in accordance with law within a period of two weeks from the date of the order. This undertaking was recorded and accepted by the Court. The Court explicitly stated that all rights and contentions of the respective parties on merits are kept open. Therefore, the Court did not delve into the merits of the SCN or the suspension of the GST registration but relied on the respondent's commitment to expedite the process. The ratio decidendi is that a litigant's grievance regarding procedural delay can be resolved by a binding undertaking from the authority to conclude the proceedings within a stipulated timeframe, while preserving substantive rights.

Key Issues

1. Whether the respondent's failure to conclude the Show Cause Notice proceedings initiated on October 3, 2024, and the continued suspension of the petitioner's GST registration, constitutes a violation of due process and the principles of natural justice, particularly in light of the petitioner's sole grievance being this delay? (Question of law). Petitioner's contention: The petitioner's primary contention is that the prolonged delay in concluding the SCN proceedings and the consequent continued suspension of its GST registration are causing undue hardship and are not in accordance with the law. Respondent's contention: The respondent, through its counsel, stated that the SCN proceedings would be finalized and disposed of within two weeks from the date of the order, subject to due verification of all facts and contentions on merits being kept open. The respondent did not otherwise contest the petitioner's grievance regarding the delay.