BANSON ENTERPRISES & ANR. vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER CGST & ORS.

Judgment text excerpt

$~71 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: 15th May, 2025 + W.P.(C) 6503/2025 BANSON ENTERPRISES & ANR. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Shrey Lodha and Mr. Akshat Vachher, Advocates. versus ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER CGST & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Ruchesh Sinha, SSC for R-1. CORAM: JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH JUSTICE RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTA Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral) 1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode. CM APPL. 29654/2025 (exemption) 2. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The application stand disposed of. W.P.(C) 6503/2025 & CM APPL. 29653/2025 3. The present petition has been filed by the Petitioners challenging inter alia the order-in-original dated 02nd February, 2025 (hereinafter, ‘the impugned order’) by which demands and penalties have been raised against the Petitioner entity- M/s Banson Enterprises. 4. The impugned order arises out of show cause notice dated 03rd August, 2024 (hereinafter, ‘the SCN’). 5. The allegations raised by the Department against the Petitioner entity in the said SCN is that a search was conducted at the premises of the Petitioner Signature Not Verified Signed By:NAMITA W.P.(C) 6503/2025 Page 1 of 8 DHYANI Signing Date:20.05.2025 10:36:24 entity and it was revealed that the Petitioner entity had issued goods-less invoices to various entities in order to enable fraudulent availment of Input Tax Credit (hereinafter, ‘ITC’). The ITC which was availed by the Petitioner entity was to the tune of Rs.1,85,73,718/- and it is this amount which was set out in the SCN as the undue benefit which was reaped by the Petitioner. 6. The Petitioner filed a reply dated 24th October, 2024 to the SCN and subsequently, an opportunity for personal hearing was also availed of by the Petitioner. Consequently, the impugn