No Natural Justice Violation If No Proper SCN Reply Filed | HC
- News|Blog|GST & Customs|
- 2 Min Read
- By Taxmann
- |
- Last Updated on 17 December, 2025

Case Details: A V Metals Marketing (P.) Ltd. vs. Principal Commissioner CGST - [2025] 181 taxmann.com 361 (Delhi)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
- Prathiba M. Singh & Renu Bhatnagar, JJ.
-
S.B. Sharma & Yashwant Gehlot, Advs. for the Petitioner.
-
Shashank Sharma, SSC & Ms Malika Kumari, Adv. for the Respondent.
Facts of the Case
The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging the demand for tax, interest, and penalty issued by the Principal Commissioner, CGST, on account of alleged fraudulent availment of input tax credit (ITC). It was submitted that various firms and businesses were floated solely for the purpose of availing ITC without the actual supply of goods or services. It was contended that the impugned order was arbitrary and the writ jurisdiction should be exercised to quash the demand. The matter was accordingly placed before the High Court.
High Court Held
The High Court held that in cases involving fraudulent availment of ITC, the court would ordinarily not exercise its writ jurisdiction as the matters involve complex transactions requiring detailed factual analysis and consideration of voluminous evidence. The Court observed that where multiple connected notices have been properly uploaded on the portal and the petitioner has not filed a satisfactory reply to the show-cause notice, interference under writ jurisdiction is not warranted. It was further held that the petitioner was to be relegated to avail of the appellate remedy under the statutory provisions.
List of Cases Referred to
- Toshniwal Electricals (P.) Ltd. v. Principal Commissioner of Central Tax Delhi North [2025] 180 taxmann.com 166 (Delhi) (para 4)
- Asstt. Commissioner of State Tax v. Commercial Steel Ltd. [2021] 130 taxmann.com 180/88 GST 799/52 GSTL 385 (SC) (para 10)
- Mukesh Kumar Garg v. Union of India [2025] 174 taxmann.com 638/98 GSTL 419 (Delhi) (para 11)
- Sheetal and Sons v. Union of India [2025] 175 taxmann.com 597 (Delhi) (para 12)
- MHJ Metaltechs (P.) Ltd. v. Central GST Delhi South [2025] 174 taxmann.com 1277/110 GST 288/99 GSTL 446 (Delhi) (para 13)
- Metal Techs v. Central GST, Delhi South [2025] 179 taxmann.com 254 (SC) (para 14).
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