https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763989 The HC upheld the GST demand of INR 1,00,36,472/- against the petitioner, noting the petitioner failed to challenge the original order under Section 74 of the CGST Act. The court found the claim of identity theft involved disputed facts unsuitable for a writ petition. The freezing of the petitioner's bank accounts was deemed a legitimate recovery action under Section 79(1)(c) of the CGST Act. The court granted the petitioner the liberty to seek separate legal remedies for identity theft, emphasizing the need for a detailed factual inquiry beyond the writ jurisdiction. en-us Fri, 13 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 31 Dec 2024 14:57:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763989 The HC upheld the GST demand of INR 1,00,36,472/- against the petitioner, noting the petitioner failed to challenge the original order under Section 74 of the CGST Act. The court found the claim of identity theft involved disputed facts unsuitable for a writ petition. The freezing of the petitioner's bank accounts was deemed a legitimate recovery action under Section 79(1)(c) of the CGST Act. The court granted the petitioner the liberty to seek separate legal remedies for identity theft, emphasizing the need for a detailed factual inquiry beyond the writ jurisdiction. Case-Laws GST Fri, 13 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763989