MHJ Metaltechs Private Limited Vs Central Goods And Services Tax Delhi South

The Supreme Court of India dismissed a Special Leave Petition (SLP) filed by MHJ Metaltechs Pvt. Ltd., affirming the Delhi High Court's interpretation of Section 75(5) of the CGST Act, 2017. The petitioner, facing allegations of fraudulent Input Tax Credit (ITC) availment amounting to ₹7.08 crores, challenged an adverse adjudication order, arguing that the denial of more than three adjournments and the supply of illegible documents violated the principles of natural justice.

The Supreme Court, while condoning the 29-day delay in refiling the petition, declined to exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution. It held that the petitioner had an adequate statutory remedy of appeal available under Sections 107 and 108 of the CGST Act.

The judgment explicitly endorsed the Delhi High Court's finding:

1. Section 75(5) sets a maximum limit of three adjournments, but it does not guarantee that all three must be granted as a matter of right. Discretion remains with the adjudicating officer.

2. Procedural deficiencies, such as the supply of illegible documents, do not automatically vitiate the entire adjudication process or violate natural justice unless the petitioner demonstrates material prejudice.

The Supreme Court dismissed the Special Leave Petition and upheld the judgment of the Delhi High Court.

• Jurisdiction: The Court found the case unfit for discretionary intervention under Article 136 and directed the petitioner to pursue the alternative statutory remedies.

• Adjournments: The interpretation of Section 75(5) as a maximum limit of three adjournments, subject to the showing of sufficient cause, was confirmed.

• Time Extension: The Court extended the time period for the petitioner to file an appeal before the Appellate Authority until October 15, 2025.