Delhi High Court Indirect Tax: Annual Digest 2025

Delay In Filing Certified Copy Of Impugned Order Doesn't Render Appeal Filed Electronically U/S 107 CGST Act Time-Barred: Delhi HCCase title: Chegg India Pvt Ltd v. UoI & Ors.Case no.: W.P.(C) 1062/2024The Delhi High Court has held that delay in filing certified copy of impugned order in an appeal preferred by Assessee under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 would not render the appeal time-barred, if it was filed online within prescribed time. A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Amit Sharma reasoned,“the condition to physically file the certified copy of the impugned decision/order is not mandatory…where the certified copy was submitted with a delay, may be condoned if the online filing was completed within the prescribed limitation period. Ultimately, what is to be borne in mind is the fact that online filing was within limitation…In most Courts and Tribunals, online filing and electronic filing is now prescribed mode and the Courts are moving towards technologically advance systems. It would be retrograde to opine that online filing, which was complete in all respects, including electronic copy of the order, is not valid filing.”S.28 Customs Act | Keeping Matter In Call Book, Taking It Up After Several Years Is Not Permissible: Delhi HC Quashes SCNCase title: Shri Balaji Enterprises v. Additional Director General New Delhi & Ors.Case no.: W.P.(C) 11207/2023The Delhi High Court has cautioned the Customs Authorities against keeping show-cause notices pending in call-book only to take them up after several years, leaving the assessee in lurch.A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Amit Sharma observed that in the absence of any “glaring impossibility”, such an approach of the authorities would not be permissible. In the case at hand, Petitioner challenged the delay of almost eight years in adjudication of the show-cause notice issued to it in 2015.Commissioner Cannot Use Its Power U/S 107(2) CGST Act To Review Order Passed By Appellate Authority: Delhi High CourtCase title: M/S G.S Industries v. Commissioner Of Central Tax And Gst, Delhi (West)Case no.: W.P.(C) 13149/2024The Delhi High Court has made it clear that a Commissioner under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act 2017 cannot, in purported exercise of its powers under Section 107(2), sit in appeal over an order passed by the Appellate Authority.A division bench of Justices Yashwant Varma and Dharmesh Sharma ruled, “The Commissioner, while seeking to review an order passed under the Act and in purported exercise of powers vested by Section 107(2), cannot possibly sit over and above an order passed by the appellate authority.”Customs Dept Should Serve Notices By Email In Addition To Post, Will Prevent Delay And Non-Appearances: Delhi High CourtCase title: Bonanza Enterprises v. The Assistant Commissioner Of Customs & Anr.Case no.: W.P.(C) 7510/2024The Delhi High Court recently called upon the Customs Department to make use of Section 153(c) of the Customs Act, 1962 which empowers it to serve notices through email. A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Amit Sharma said such an approach will prevent delay and non-appearances, leading to expeditious disposal of matters.“In the opinion of this Court, the provision itself makes it clear that notices can be sent by email…The Customs Department ought to in future follow a system by which in addition to notices by speed post, registered post or courier, notices are also sent on the email address which is provided on the letterhead of the Petitioner or any authorised person. This would avoid substantial delay and matters proceeding ex-parte as has happened in the present case,” it said.Customs Dept Cannot Encash Bank Guarantee Furnished By Trader During Pendency Of Appeal If Pre-Deposit Is Made: Delhi HC AffirmsCase title: Amar Singh And Sons Tree Nuts LLP v. The Superintendent Of Customs, Epm, Import & Ors.Case no.: W.P.(C) 149/2025Based on a circular issued by the Finance Ministry, the Delhi High Court has affirmed that the Customs Department cannot encash the bank guarantee furnished by a trader, whose import/export transactions are in dispute, if the latter has made a pre-deposit with his appeal against the demand and penalty.A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Dharmesh Sharma observed, “A perusal of the Circular and the clauses extracted above would show that no coercive measures can be taken against the Appellant during the period when the limitation for filing of the appeal has not expired. In addition, if the pre-deposit has already been made the remaining amount cannot be recovered by encashment of the bank guarantee.”Tariff, License Fee Received By Electricity Regulatory Commissions Not Exigible To Tax: Delhi High CourtCase title: Central Electricity Regulatory Commission v. The Additional Director Directorate General Of Gst Intelligence (Dggi) & AnrCase no.: W.P.(C) 10680/2024 and connected mattersThe Delhi High Court...

Delhi High Court Indirect Tax: Annual Digest 2025

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Delhi High Court Indirect Tax: Annual Digest 2025

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers