Delhi High Court Sets Aside GST Order For Ignoring Taxpayer's Request For More Time To Submit Documents

The Delhi High Court has set aside an order passed by the GST Department against a civil engineering company, holding that the failure to consider the company's request for additional time to submit documents violated the principles of natural justice.

The Division Bench of Justices Avneesh Jhingan and Amit Sharma observed that the Department was required to consider the request for an extension of time before passing the impugned order.

“The minimum that was expected from a quasi-judicial authority was at least to deal with the request for grant of further time and thereafter take an appropriate decision thereon,” it said.

The Court thus remanded the matter to the Department for fresh consideration from the stage at which the company's request for an extension of time to submit additional documents was pending.

A show cause notice had been issued to the company, to which it submitted a reply on May 23, 2022. It was subsequently granted an opportunity of personal hearing on November 7, 2023.

At the company's request, the matter was adjourned to November 15, 2023. On that date, the company sought a further extension until November 24, 2023, to produce the requisite documents.

However, the Department passed the impugned order on November 24 without considering the request.

The company approached the High Court, contending that it had not been granted a reasonable opportunity to defend its case.

The Department on the other hand argued that the company had been granted sufficient opportunities and that it had waited nine days beyond November 15 before passing the order.

The High Court rejected the Department's contention, observing that the request for further time had not been considered.

"Once the request for further time was not considered then there was no occasion for the petitioner to file the additional documents," it observed.

The Court further noted that the impugned order had been passed on November 24, the very date until which the company had sought an extension.

As such, holding that the impugned order was violative of the principles of natural justice, the Court set it aside and remanded the matter.

For Petitioner: Advocates Puneet Rai & Srishti Sharma

For Respondents: Advocate Aditya Singla, SSC with Arya Suresh Nair