GST | Alleging Denial Of Hearing Insufficient If Assessee Itself Wasn't Diligent In Responding To SCN Or Attending Hearing: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has refused to interfere with a demand order passed by the GST Department without hearing the assessee, after noting that the assessee itself was not diligent in responding to the show cause notice or attending the personal hearing despite notice.A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Rajneesh Kumar Gupta observed,“Considering the fact that (i) The Department has given the show cause notice and the personal hearing notices to the Petitioner; (ii) The Petitioner has not been diligent; the Department cannot be held to blame for not giving a proper hearing.”The Petitioner-assessee sought to quash the order passed by the Respondent-Assistant Commissioner of CGST, confirming demand of Input Tax Credit of Rs. 34,92,903/- allegedly availed without receipt of goods, along with equivalent penalty.Petitioner submitted that he joined the hearing link on 15th January, 2025 but, he was not granted access to attend the hearing.On perusing the record however, the Court found that personal hearing was provided on three dates i.e., 13th, 14th and 15th January, 2025 however, the Petitioner sought to join only on 15th that too for the purposes of seeking an extension.Moreover, it found that two show cause notices were issued to the Petitioner on 22nd July, 2022 and 3rd August, 2024 but, no reply to the SCN dated 3rd August, 2024 was filed.The impugned order was finally passed on 28th January, 2025, almost two weeks after the date of personal hearing.“From the above, it is clear that no reply was also filed to the show cause notice even after the alleged access to the personal hearing was not granted…Beyond that, no effort was made by the Petitioner to either file the reply or file the documents physically or otherwise…it is clear that the Petitioner has not been diligent in filing the reply and attending the hearings,” the Court observed and refused to interfere.Appearance: Mr. Salil Arora and Ms. Reeva Chugh Arora, Advocate for Petitioner; Mr. Vishal Chadha, Sr. Standing Counsel for CGST.Case title: Pret Study by Janak Fashions Private Limited Vs Assistant Commissioner, CGSTCitation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 717Case no.: W.P.(C) 5878/2025Click here to read order

GST | Alleging Denial Of Hearing Insufficient If Assessee Itself Wasn't Diligent In Responding To SCN Or Attending Hearing: Delhi High Court

Kapil Dhyani

Tags