No Natural Justice Violation If No Proper SCN Reply Filed

Case Details: A V Metals Marketing (P.) Ltd. vs. Principal Commissioner CGST - [2025] 181 taxmann.com 361 (Delhi)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

Prathiba M. Singh & Renu Bhatnagar, JJ.
S.B. Sharma & Yashwant Gehlot, Advs. for the Petitioner.
Shashank Sharma, SSC & Ms Malika Kumari, Adv. for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging the demand for tax, interest, and penalty issued by the Principal Commissioner, CGST, on account of alleged fraudulent availment of input tax credit (ITC). It was submitted that various firms and businesses were floated solely for the purpose of availing ITC without the actual supply of goods or services. It was contended that the impugned order was arbitrary and the writ jurisdiction should be exercised to quash the demand. The matter was accordingly placed before the High Court.

High Court Held

The High Court held that in cases involving fraudulent availment of ITC, the court would ordinarily not exercise its writ jurisdiction as the matters involve complex transactions requiring detailed factual analysis and consideration of voluminous evidence. The Court observed that where multiple connected notices have been properly uploaded on the portal and the petitioner has not filed a satisfactory reply to the show-cause notice, interference under writ jurisdiction is not warranted. It was further held that the petitioner was to be relegated to avail of the appellate remedy under the statutory provisions.