B R Ceramics P Limited Vs Commissioner of DGST and Ors (Delhi High Court)
Delhi High Court has set aside a demand order issued by the Goods and Service Tax (GST) authorities against B R Ceramics Private Limited, directing that the company’s appeal be considered on its merits. The decision, delivered in the case of B R Ceramics P Limited Vs Commissioner of DGST and Ors., comes amidst ongoing judicial scrutiny of certain GST notifications, with the Supreme Court currently deliberating their legal validity.
B R Ceramics Private Limited, through its Director Amit Gupta, had filed a petition challenging a show cause notice dated May 28, 2024, and the subsequent demand order dated August 30, 2024, issued by the Sales Tax Officer Class II/AVATO, Ward 45, Zone 3, Delhi. A central aspect of the company’s challenge was the vires (legal authority) of several GST notifications: Notification Nos. 09/2023-Central Tax dated March 31, 2023, 56/2023-Central Tax dated December 28, 2023, 09/2023-State Tax dated June 22, 2023, and 56/2023-State Tax dated July 11, 2024.
The Delhi High Court observed that the validity of these notifications was already a subject of extensive legal debate, specifically in a batch of petitions led by W.P.(C) 16499/2023 titled ‘DJST Traders Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India and Ors.’. During proceedings on April 22, 2025, in this broader batch, it was noted that the primary challenge to these notifications centered on whether the proper procedure, particularly the mandatory prior recommendation of the GST Council under Section 168A of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, was followed before their issuance. Concerns were raised that while Notification No. 9 had a prior recommendation, Notification No. 56/2023 (Central Tax) received ratification after its issuance, contrary to the statutory mandate. Similar issues were highlighted for Notification No. 56 of 2023 (State Tax), which was issued after the expiry of the limitation period stipulated by an earlier notification.
