TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
AI-powered research trained on the authentic TaxTMI database.
Launch AI Search →Powered by Weblekha - Building Scalable Websites
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Highlights
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Highlights
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
The HC dismissed the petitioner's criminal petition seeking to quash proceedings under Section 132(6) of the CGST Act, 2017 for fraudulent ITC availment. The court found that statements on record revealed the petitioner actively managed GST filings and invoice generation for multiple entities, including bogus invoices without actual goods movement, establishing prima facie involvement in the fraudulent scheme. The challenge to summons validity failed as the cited instruction was issued after the summons in question, precluding retrospective application. The court held that adjudication based solely on investigating officer statements and existing departmental penalty were matters for trial determination. Applying Section 482 Cr.P.C. principles, the HC declined premature interference given incomplete contested facts requiring full examination before the trial court.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
