FUTURE CONSUMER LIMITED vs UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

Judgment text excerpt

$~52 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: 10th October, 2025 + W.P.(C) 15611/2025, CM APPL. 63897/2025 & CM APPL. 63898/2025 FUTURE CONSUMER LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Rohit Anil Rathi, Mr. Rahul Totala, Mr. Mitesh Jain & Mr. Yashas, Advs. (M: 8587907189) versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Arjun Malik, Adv. for CBIC. 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 by Future Consumer Ltd. challenging the impugned order-in-original dated 24th August, 2024 (hereinafter, ‘the impugned order’) by which a demand has been raised against the Petitioner in the following terms: 3. The main ground of challenge urged by ld. Counsel for the Petitioner in Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed W.P.(C) 15611/2025 Page 1 of 7 By:KESHAV Signing Date:13.10.2025 16:51:30 this case is that the impugned order does not bear the signature of the official who has passed the order. Hence, it is contended that the impugned order is invalid and is liable to be set aside. 4. On the other hand, ld. Counsel for the Respondent points out that the impugned order is accompanied by a DRC-07 which contains the name and designation of the concerned officer. It is also submitted that post 1st June, 2024 the mechanism that has been set up in the GST portal is that every Officer who is uploading an order has to upload the same along with his credentials – thus there is no possibility of any irregularities. 5. Ld. Counsel for the Petitioner states that they had also filed a rectification application in respect of the impugned order, which was decided vide order dated 26th December, 2024 in the following terms: “xxx In this regard