BRAHAM PRAKASH PROP. OF M/S SHRI SHYAM TRADING CO. vs ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER, ADJUDICATION, CGST DELHI NORTH AND ORS. & ORS.

Judgment text excerpt

$~56 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: 9th December, 2025 Uploaded on: 11th December, 2025 + W.P.(C) 18673/2025, CM APPL. 77607/2025 & CM APPL. 77608/2025 BRAHAM PRAKASH PROP. OF M/S SHRI SHYAM TRADING CO. .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Puneet Rai and Ms. Srishti Sharma, Advs. versus ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER, ADJUDICATION, CGST DELHI NORTH AND ORS. & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Shubham Tyagi, SSC CBIC & Ms. Navruti Ojha, Adv. CORAM: JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH JUSTICE SHAIL JAIN JUDGMENT Prathiba M. Singh, J. 1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode. CM APPL. 77608/2025 (for exemption) 2. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Application is disposed of. W.P.(C) 18673/2025, CM APPL. 77607/2025 3. This is a petition filed by the Petitioner under Article 226 inter alia challenging the impugned order dated 21st January, 2025 by which the demand has been raised upon the Petitioner in the following terms: W.P.(C) 18673/2025 Page 1 of 10 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DHIRENDER KUMAR Signing Date:11.12.2025 13:07:49 4. The case of the Petitioner is that no personal hearing notice was served upon the Petitioner during the course of adjudication proceedings prior to passing of the impugned order and there was also a delay in uploading of the Show Cause Notice dated 23rd July, 2024 (hereinafter ‘SCN’) itself, since the same is stated to have been uploaded on 27th August, 2024 when the limitation period ended on 5th August, 2024. 5. Mr. Tyagi, ld. Senior Standing Counsel submits that the impugned order is an appealable order and it involves allegations of availment of fake Input Tax Credit (hereinafter ‘ITC’) by the Petitioner. 6. The Court has considered the matter. A perusal of the impugned order would show that the DGGI, Rohta