Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
The HC dismissed petitioners' challenge to investigation proceedings concerning large-scale tax evasion through fraudulent input tax credit under HPGST/CGST Act. The court held that Cr.P.C provisions apply to GST Act proceedings absent contrary provisions, citing Radhika Agarwal v. Union of India. Petitioners' contention that investigation was improper because officials failed to contact Delhi GST authorities was rejected. The court found that discovering non-existent entities at invoice addresses sufficiently established prima facie case of fake invoices. Following Mukesh Singh precedent, the court ruled investigation validity is not vitiated merely because departmental officials conducted it. The HC emphasized that while exercising inherent power, courts examine prima facie cases without evaluating evidence creditworthiness, which remains trial court's domain. Consequently, the complaint could not be quashed based on alleged investigative deficiencies.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
