HARI BHOOMI COMMUNICATIONS PRIVATE LIMITED vs COMMISSIONER OF GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DELHI & ORS.

Judgment text excerpt

$~44 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: 04th September, 2025 + W.P.(C) 13606/2025 & CM APPL. 55807/2025 HARI BHOOMI COMMUNICATIONS PRIVATE LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Ankur Das, Mr. Gautam Swarup, Mr Rudhra Deoshthali, Ms. Sakshi Pandey, Mr Rishabh Kanojiya & Mr Tanmay Malik, Advs versus COMMISSIONER OF GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DELHI & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Dhruv Rohatgi, Ms. Chandrika Sachdev & Mr. Dhruv Kumarm, Advs CORAM: JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH JUSTICE SHAIL JAIN JUDGMENT Prathiba M. Singh, J. 1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode. CM APPL. 55808/2025 ( for Exemption) 2. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Application stands disposed of. W.P.(C) 13606/2025 & CM APPL. 55807/2025 3. The present petition has been filed by the Petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, challenging the Show Cause Notice dated 23th September, 2023 and order dated 1st December, 2023 passed by the office of Sales Tax Officer Class II/ AVATO, Delhi (hereinafter, ‘the impugned order’) for the financial year 2017-18. Signature Not Verified Signed By:SUNITA W.P.(C) 13606/2025 Page 1 of 5 KUMARI Signing Date:09.09.2025 00:08:59 4. In the present case, the submission of the Petitioner, on facts, is that the SCN dated 23rd September, 2023, from which the impugned order arises, was uploaded on the ‘Additional Notices Tab’. Thereafter, reminder notice was issued on 22nd November, 2023 which was also uploaded on the ‘Additional Notices Tab’. 5. Therefore, the same was not brought to the knowledge of the Petitioner due to which no reply was filed. Thereafter, detailed order dated 01st December, 2023 was issued. Hence, the impugned order was passed without providing the Petitioner with an opportunity to challeng