SAMYAK JAIN vs SUPERINTENDENT (ADJUDICATION), CENTRAL GST DELHI & ORS.

Judgment text excerpt

$~2 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: 25th August, 2025 + W.P.(C) 9139/2025 & CM APPL. 38812/2025 SAMYAK JAIN .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Pulkit Verma, Mr. Peyush Pruthi & Mr. Himanshu Yadav, Advs. versus SUPERINTENDENT (ADJUDICATION), CENTRAL GST DELHI & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Atul Tripathi, SSC, CBIC with Mr. Gaurav Mani Tripathi & Mr. Shubham Mishra, Advs for R-1 & 2. Mr. Rakesh Kumar, CGSC with Mr. Sunil, Adv for R-4/Delhi Police (9811549455). Mr. Samyar Jain, Adv. with Insp Awadesh Kumar & Insp. S.S. Gill, EOW. Ms. Urvi Mohan, Adv. for GNCTD. Inspector S.S. Gill, EOW, Delhi Police. CORAM: JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH JUSTICE SHAIL JAIN Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral) 1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode. 2. The present petition has been filed on behalf of the Petitioner-Samyak Jain under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, challenging the order dated 31st January, 2025 (hereinafter, the ‘impugned order’) passed by the Respondent No. 1- Superintendent (Adjudication), Central GST Delhi. 3. Vide the impugned order, a demand has been raised on the Petitioner for a sum of over Rs. 48 crores. Signature Not Verified W.P.(C) 9139/2025 Page 1 of 5 Digitally Signed By:DHIRENDER KUMAR Signing Date:27.08.2025 18:38:54 4. It is stated that the Petitioner was registered under the Value Added Tax (‘VAT’) regime under the trading style, ‘M/s Samyak International’. However, upon introduction of the Goods and Services Tax (‘GST’) regime, a provisional registration was allotted to ‘M/s Samyak International’, which according to the Petitioner, was not sought by him. 5. It is the case of the Petitioner that he had closed his business operations from 28th July, 2017 and had sought a new registration number under th