Matter Remanded After Assessee Missed SCN Due to Consultant | HC Sets Aside GST Order
- Blog|News|GST & Customs|
- 2 Min Read
- By Taxmann
- |
- Last Updated on 2 December, 2025

Case Details: Concept Eateries (P.) Ltd. vs. Union of India - [2025] 180 taxmann.com 692 (Delhi)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
- Prathiba M. Singh & Shail Jain, JJ.
-
Puneet Rai, Adv. for the Petitioner.
-
Vaishali Gupta, Panel Counsel for the Respondent.
Facts of the Case
The petitioner filed a challenge against a show cause notice and the consequential order issued under the CGST Act and the Delhi GST Act for the financial year 2019-20. It was contended that the firm’s GST consultant, who was responsible for managing all GST-related filings and communications, had failed to examine the notice within the prescribed time, which prevented the petitioner from submitting a response or participating in the proceedings. The petitioner also challenged the validity of notifications under the CGST Act extending the limitation period. In view of these contentions, the matter was brought before the High Court.
High Court Held
The High Court held that the impugned order was liable to be set aside due to lack of proper hearing and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication, directing that the petitioner be given an opportunity to respond to the show cause notice. The Court emphasised the principles of natural justice under Section 73 of the CGST Act and Delhi GST Act. On the challenge to the notifications, the Court observed that the issue was pending before the Supreme Court in HCC‑SEW‑Meil‑AAG JV v. Asstt. Commissioner of State Tax and deferred any decision, leaving it contingent on the Supreme Court’s outcome.
List of Cases Reviewed
- Sugandha Enterprises v. Commissioner of DGST [2025] 179 taxmann.com 399 (Delhi) (Para 10) followed
- DJST Traders (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India [2025] 174 taxmann.com 191 (Delhi) (para 5)
- HCC-SEW-Meil-AAG JV v. Asstt. Commissioner of State Tax [2025] 174 taxmann.com 1080 (SC) (para 14) followed
List of Cases Referred to
- DJST Traders (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India [2025] 174 taxmann.com 191 (Delhi) (para 4)
- HCC-SEW-Meil-AAG JV v. Asstt. Commissioner of State Tax [2025] 174 taxmann.com 1080 (SC) (para 5)
- Engineers India Ltd. v. Union of India [W.P. (C) No. 9214 of 2024, dated 23-4-2025] (para 6)
- Sugandha Enterprises v. Commissioner of DGST [2025] 179 taxmann.com 399 (Delhi) (para 9).
Disclaimer: The content/information published on the website is only for general information of the user and shall not be construed as legal advice. While the Taxmann has exercised reasonable efforts to ensure the veracity of information/content published, Taxmann shall be under no liability in any manner whatsoever for incorrect information, if any.

Taxmann Publications has a dedicated in-house Research & Editorial Team. This team consists of a team of Chartered Accountants, Company Secretaries, and Lawyers. This team works under the guidance and supervision of editor-in-chief Mr Rakesh Bhargava.
The Research and Editorial Team is responsible for developing reliable and accurate content for the readers. The team follows the six-sigma approach to achieve the benchmark of zero error in its publications and research platforms. The team ensures that the following publication guidelines are thoroughly followed while developing the content:
- The statutory material is obtained only from the authorized and reliable sources
- All the latest developments in the judicial and legislative fields are covered
- Prepare the analytical write-ups on current, controversial, and important issues to help the readers to understand the concept and its implications
- Every content published by Taxmann is complete, accurate and lucid
- All evidence-based statements are supported with proper reference to Section, Circular No., Notification No. or citations
- The golden rules of grammar, style and consistency are thoroughly followed
- Font and size that’s easy to read and remain consistent across all imprint and digital publications are applied

CA | CS | CMA