The Delhi High Court addressed a case involving M/s Technosys Integrated Solutions Pvt. Ltd., which challenged a significant GST demand following an audit covering the financial years 2017–18 to 2021–22. The company had initially paid ₹49.5 lakh via DRC-03 but was later issued a Show Cause Notice (SCN) demanding over ₹18.67 crore due to alleged incorrect tax classification and an additional ₹1.3 crore liability. The department confirmed the entire demand with a 200% penalty through an Order-in-Original, prompting the petitioner to seek relief from the High Court through a writ petition.
The petitioner contested the consolidation of multiple financial years into one SCN and argued that the issue was solely about tax classification, not fraud. The primary issue was whether a writ petition is maintainable against a GST demand when an alternative appellate remedy exists and whether multiple years can be consolidated in a single SCN.
Read More: Gujarat High Court : omission of Rule 96(10) applies to all pending proceedings and not just only future cases; Petitioner entitled to refund [Order attached]
The Court determined that it would not consider the merits of the case since an effective alternative remedy, such as an appeal under GST law, was available. It clarified that issues of tax classification and rates should be resolved by the appellate authority, rather than through writ jurisdiction. Citing the precedent set by Ambika Traders, the Court noted that GST law allows for the consolidation of multiple financial years in a single SCN. Consequently, the Court dismissed the writ petition but allowed the petitioner to pursue statutory remedies, leaving all issues open for consideration.
Order Date - 16 March 2026
Parties : M/S TECHNOSYS INTEGRATED SOLUTIONS PVT LTD Vs UNION OF INDIA, CGSTR NORTH COMMISSIONERATE, OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER CGST, AUDIT-I
Facts -
- M/s Technosys Integrated Solutions Pvt. Ltd. approached the Delhi High Court challenging a massive GST demand raised after audit for FY 2017–18 to 2021–22.
- During audit, the company paid ₹49.5 lakh via DRC-03, but later faced a Show Cause Notice demanding over ₹18.67 crore alleging wrong classification (12% vs higher rate) and additional ₹1.3 crore liability.
- The department confirmed the entire demand with 200% penalty through Order-in-Original, leading the petitioner to file a writ petition seeking quashing and waiver of pre-deposit.
- The petitioner argued that multiple financial years were wrongly clubbed in one SCN and that the dispute was only about tax classification, not fraud.
Issue -
- Whether a writ petition is maintainable against GST demand when an alternative appellate remedy exists, and whether multiple years can be clubbed in one SCN?
Order -
- The Court held that it will not examine merits since an effective alternative remedy (appeal under GST law) is available.
- It clarified that the issue of classification and tax rate must be decided by the appellate authority, not in writ jurisdiction.
- Relying on Ambika Traders, the Court observed that GST law permits consolidation of multiple financial years in a single SCN.
- The Court dismissed the petition but allowed the petitioner to pursue statutory remedies, keeping all issues open.
