https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774997 Delhi HC held that challenge to summary order was not barred by limitation. Regarding penalty levy beyond permissible limits under Section 122(1) of CGST Act, 2017, the court determined this ground could be raised in appeal. Citing precedent in M/S. SHEETAL AND SONS case involving similar issues with main firm SR Impex and SR International, the court held that writ jurisdiction would not be exercised for matters concerning fraudulent availment of Input Tax Credit. The impugned order being appealable under Section 107 of CGST Act, petitioners were directed to pursue appellate remedy before Appellate Authority. Court granted extension allowing appeals filed by July 15, 2025 with requisite pre-deposit under Section 107 to not be dismissed for limitation. Petition disposed of. en-us Tue, 27 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 17 Jul 2025 08:19:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774997 Delhi HC held that challenge to summary order was not barred by limitation. Regarding penalty levy beyond permissible limits under Section 122(1) of CGST Act, 2017, the court determined this ground could be raised in appeal. Citing precedent in M/S. SHEETAL AND SONS case involving similar issues with main firm SR Impex and SR International, the court held that writ jurisdiction would not be exercised for matters concerning fraudulent availment of Input Tax Credit. The impugned order being appealable under Section 107 of CGST Act, petitioners were directed to pursue appellate remedy before Appellate Authority. Court granted extension allowing appeals filed by July 15, 2025 with requisite pre-deposit under Section 107 to not be dismissed for limitation. Petition disposed of. Case-Laws GST Tue, 27 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774997