KURLON RETAIL LIMITED vs SALES TAX OFFICER & ORS.

Judgment text excerpt

$~63 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: 28th August, 2025 + W.P.(C) 13121/2025, CM APPL. 53682/2025 & CM APPL. 53683/2025 KURLON RETAIL LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Manish Mishra, Ms. Joybrata Misra and Mr. Sameer Samal, Advs. versus SALES TAX OFFICER & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Sumit K. Batra, Adv. CORAM: JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH JUSTICE SHAIL JAIN JUDGMENT Prathiba M. Singh, J. 1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode. 2. The present petition has been filed, inter alia, challenging the impugned order dated 21st August, 2024 passed in respect of Financial Year 2019-20 by the office of Sales Tax Officer Class II/ AVATO, Delhi, raising a demand of Rs. 31,58,436/- under the head of ‘net access ITC availed’. The petition also challenges the vires of Notification No. 56/2023-Central Tax dated 28th December, 2023 and Notification No. 56/2023-State Tax dated 7th July, 2024 (hereinafter ‘impugned notifications’). 3. The validity of the impugned notifications was under consideration before this Court in a batch of petitions with the lead petition being W.P.(C) Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed W.P.(C) 13121/2025 Page 1 of 10 By:DEVANSHU JOSHI Signing Date:01.09.2025 18:32:45 16499/2023 titled ‘DJST Traders Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India and Ors.’ In the said batch of petitions, on 22nd April 2025, the parties were heard at length qua the validity of the impugned notifications and accordingly, the following order was passed: “4. Submissions have been heard in part. The broad challenge to both sets of Notifications is on the ground that the proper procedure was not followed prior to the issuance of the same. In terms of Section 168A, prior recommendation of the GST Council is essential for extending deadlines. In respect of