Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
PRATHIBA M.SINGH, SHAIL JAIN
Global Telecommunication Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. hearing conducted in hybrid mode. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. challenging the validity of gst notifications related to limitation. (Para 3) |
| 3. different high court interpretations on gst notifications. (Para 5 , 7) |
| 4. judicial directions on providing opportunity to parties for hearings. (Para 8 , 10 , 11) |
| 5. petition disposed with directives for future proceedings. (Para 12) |
JUDGMENT :
1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.
2. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The application is disposed of.
3. The present petition has been filed by the Petitioner- M/s Global Telecommunication Pvt Ltd under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, challenging
(ii) the Show Cause Notice dated 11th July, 2023 (hereinafter ‘SCN’).
5. The validity of the impugned notifications was under considerationbefore this Court in a batch of petitions with the lead petition being W.P.(C)16499/2023 titled ‘DJST Traders Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India and Ors.’. Inthe said batch of petitions, on 22nd April 2025, the parties were heard at lengthqua the validity of the impugned notification and accordingly, the following order was passed:
5. In fact, Notification Nos. 09 and 56 of 20
The court mandates fair hearing opportunities for petitions challenged due to improper notification communications, subject to Supreme Court review.
Parties must be given a fair opportunity to respond to Show Cause Notices in administrative proceedings to ensure proper adjudication.
Notifications extending deadlines under GST must follow procedures set by the GST Act, particularly Section 168A, or face legal challenges.
Notifications under the GST Act must adhere to procedural requirements, ensuring parties receive fair opportunity to respond to demands initiated by show cause notices.
Court emphasizes the necessity of fair hearing in tax adjudication processes.
The court ruled that procedural fairness is essential in tax assessments, emphasizing the need for proper notice and an opportunity for the petitioner to respond before decisions are finalized.
Fair opportunity to respond to proceedings must be ensured in administrative actions under taxation laws.
The court established that procedural fairness requires a proper opportunity to be heard prior to any adjudication, particularly in tax-related proceedings, thereby allowing the petitioner to respond....
Fair hearing rights in tax disputes are essential, emphasizing adherence to procedural validity in notifications under GST law.
Procedural fairness requires that parties receive adequate notice and opportunity to respond before demands or penalties are enforced by administrative authorities.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
