Delhi High Court – Orders
Jbn Impex Private Limited vs Additional Commissioner Adjudication … on 29 April, 2026
$~78, 79 & 81
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 5814/2026 & CM APPL. 28621/2026, CM APPL.
28622/2026
JBN IMPEX PRIVATE LIMITED .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Abhishek Garg, Mr. Yash Gaiha,
Mr. Naman Mehta, Advs.
versus
ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER ADJUDICATION CGST DELHI
NORTH & ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Shlok Chandra, Senior Standing
Counsel for CGST with Mr Parikshit
Singh Bhati and Ms Lolita Crasta,
Advocates for R-1 to 3.
79
+ W.P.(C) 5838/2026 & CM APPL. 28670/2026, CM APPL.
28671/2026
BRILLIANT METALS PRIVATE LIMITED .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Abhishek Garg, Mr. Yash Gaiha,
Mr. Naman Mehta, Advs.
versus
JOINT COMMISSIONER ADJUDICATION CGST DELHI NORTH
& ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Ms. Anushree Narain, Sr. Standing
Counsel with Mr. Yamit Jetley, Adv.
81
+ W.P.(C) 5866/2026 & CM APPL. 28734/2026, CM APPL.
28735/2026
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 30/04/2026 at 21:30:16
PROGRESSIVE ALLOYS (INDIA) PRIVATE
LIMITED .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Abhishek Garg, Mr. Yash Gaiha,
Mr. Naman Mehta, Advs.
versus
JOINT COMMISSIONER ADJUDICATION CGST
DELHI NORTH & ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Appearance not given.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NITIN WASUDEO SAMBRE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY DIGPAUL
ORDER
% 29.04.2026
1. Heard.
2. The prayer in the W.P.(C) 5814/2026 reads thus:-
“A. Issue appropriate Writ in the nature of Certiorari or any
other appropriate writ/order/directions challenging vires &
declaring that Section 74 (2) and Section 74 (10) of the Central
Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017, cannot be used by Respondents
to determine tax by issuing consolidated show cause notices by
combining multiple financial years and consequently issuing an
order consolidating and combining multiple financial years to
the detriment of taxpayers and curtailing the rights of taxpayers
as far as principles of natural justice and limitation are
concerned.
B. Issue appropriate Writ in the nature of Certiorari or any
other appropriate writ/order/directions declaring that Section 74
(2) and Section 74 (10) of the Central Goods & Services Tax
Act, 2017 do not permit the issuance of consolidated show cause
notices by combining multiple financial years and consequently
issuing an order consolidating and combining multiple financial
years.
C. Issue appropriate Writ in the nature of Certiorari or any
other appropriate writ/order/directions for quashing the
Impugned Order dated 05.12.2024 issued by Respondent No. 1
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 30/04/2026 at 21:30:16
on 20.01.2025 under Section 74 of the Central Goods & Services
Tax Act, 2017 as the same have been issued for multiple
financial years, in a wholly arbitrary and illegal manner.
D. Issue appropriate Writ in the nature of Certiorari or any
other appropriate writ/order/directions for quashing the
Impugned Show Cause Notice dated 23.10.2023, issued along
with FORM GST DRC – 01 on 03.08.2024 by Respondent No. 2
under Section 74 of the Central Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017
as the same have been issued for multiple financial years, in a
wholly arbitrary and illegal manner.
E. Issue appropriate Writ in the nature of Prohibition or any
other appropriate writ/order/directions to grant stay on the
operation of the Impugned Order dated 05.12.2024 issued by
Respondent No.1 on 20.01.2025 under Section 74 of the Central
Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017.
F. Pass any fresh order or any other appropriate writ, order or
direction as this Hon’ble High Court may deem fit, just and
appropriate in the facts and circumstances of the present case.”
3. The genesis in support of the aforesaid prayer being made in the
present writ petition is based on a consolidation of multiple financial years.
4. It is the case of the petitioner that the issue is sub judice before the
Apex Court and also the Apex Court in the matter of M/S Aparna
Collection Vs. Union Of India in WP(C) No. 890/2025 has granted liberty
to the petitioner to approach this Court, in light of the decisions of the
Madras High Court and the High Court of Andhra Pradesh on the said issue
which according to the petitioner, are in its favour.
5. According to him, in both these judgments, it is decided by the Courts
that the clubbing of Show Cause Notices for multiple financial years is not
permissible.
6. The aforesaid contentions are appreciated in the light of the judgment
of this Court in the matter of “Ambika Traders through Proprietor Gaurav
Gupta v. Additional Commissioner Adjudication DGGSTI, CGST Delhi
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 30/04/2026 at 21:30:16
North” (2025:DHC:6181-DB), which is further followed in “M/S
Technosys Integrated Solutions Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India & Ors.
(2026:DHC:2233-DB). In both these matters, this Court has already held
that the consolidation is very much permissible.
7. Apart from the above, it is the case of respondents that in the matter
of “Vallabh Textiles Though Its Authorized Representative v.
Additional/Joint Commissioner, CGST Delhi East Commissionerate And
Ors. in W.P (C)13855/2024, it is already ruled in favour of the respondent
that such consolidation is already permissible.
8. The relevant observations made in the matter of Vallabh Textiles
(supra) reads thus:-
1. The instant writ petition seeks to assail the validity of a
Show Cause Notice [“SCN”] dated 29 May 2024 and which
raises issues pertaining to Financial Years [“FYs”] 2017-18
to 2021-22.
2. The principal ground of challenge which was addressed
before us was with respect to the action of the respondents
who have proceeded to issue a consolidated notice for the
aforesaid period.
3. 3. On an ex-facie perusal of Section 74 of the Central Goods
& Services Tax Act, 2017 [“CGST”]/Delhi Goods &
Services Tax Act, 2017 [“DGST”], we find ourselves unable
to sustain that challenge in the absence of any prohibition
that may have been statutorily engrafted in this respect. That
in any case would not constitute a jurisdictional challenge
warranting the writ petition being entertained against a
SCN.
4. Insofar as FY 2017-18 is concerned, it was the submission
of learned counsel for the writ petitioner that the same
would not sustain bearing in mind the provisions contained
in Section 74(10) of the CGST Act, 2017/DGST Act, 2017.
Insofar as that question is concerned, we leave it open to the
writ petitioner to initiate appropriate proceedings
independently.
5. Bearing in mind the well settled principles which govern
situations and contingencies in which a SCN challenge may
be entertained by a Court under Article 226 of the
Constitution, we find no ground to entertain the instant writ
petition.
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 30/04/2026 at 21:30:16
6. It shall, subject to the aforesaid observation, stand
dismissed.
9. The relevant observations made in the judgment of Ambika Traders
(supra) are as under:-
“54. The present case appears to be one such case where a
substantial amount of ITC is alleged to have been
availed/utilized running into more than Rs.83 Crores. The
Petitioner is alleged to be one of the main entities/persons
involved in the said activity. The transactions are between the
years 2017 to 2021. A consolidated notice is, therefore, not
merely permissible but, in fact, required in such cases in order
to establish the illegal modality adopted by such businesses and
entities. The language of the provision itself does not prevent
issuance of SCN or order for multiple years in a consolidated
manner.
55. Even in the order which has been impugned before this
Court, the details of the amounts for each year are set out
clearly in the content of the order itself and is, therefore, clearly
decipherable. Thus, it cannot be held that the issuance of
consolidated notice or order violates the language of the
provisions. Especially, in the case of fraudulent availment of ITC
or utilization of ITC such consolidated notice and order would
not just be permissible but may, in fact, be required to show the
wilful misstatement or suppression or the fraudulent
availment/utilization.”
10. In the aforesaid background, we are of the view that since this Court
has consistently taken a view that consolidation of the notices for various
financial years is very much permitted, we see no reason to take a different
view than the view which is already consistently expressed by this Court.
11. Merely, because the other High Courts i.e., Madras High Court and
High Court of Andhra Pradesh, in the opinion of the petitioner have taken a
different view that would not persuade us to deviate from the view which
has already been expressed in the aforesaid judgment.
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 30/04/2026 at 21:30:16
12. That being so, in our opinion, the issue is squarely covered by both
these judgments viz. in the matter of Ambika Traders (Supra) and in the
matter of Vallabh Textiles (supra).
13. That being so, these writ petitions stand dismissed.
14. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
15. Order be uploaded on the website of this Court.
NITIN WASUDEO SAMBRE, J
AJAY DIGPAUL, J
APRIL 29, 2026/sky/ok
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 30/04/2026 at 21:30:16
