https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775550 The HC held that writ jurisdiction is generally not available in cases involving fraudulent availment of ITC due to the impact on the exchequer and GST regime. Given allegations against the petitioner concerning fraudulent ITC claims by fake firms, the writ petition was not entertained. The court acknowledged the petitioner's contention regarding inadequate notice but noted some parties had appeared. The petitioner was granted an opportunity to file an appeal under Section 107 of the CGST Act by 31 August 2025 with the requisite pre-deposit. If filed timely, the appeal would not be dismissed on limitation grounds and would be heard on merits. The petition was disposed of accordingly. en-us Tue, 22 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 26 Jul 2025 08:39:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775550 The HC held that writ jurisdiction is generally not available in cases involving fraudulent availment of ITC due to the impact on the exchequer and GST regime. Given allegations against the petitioner concerning fraudulent ITC claims by fake firms, the writ petition was not entertained. The court acknowledged the petitioner's contention regarding inadequate notice but noted some parties had appeared. The petitioner was granted an opportunity to file an appeal under Section 107 of the CGST Act by 31 August 2025 with the requisite pre-deposit. If filed timely, the appeal would not be dismissed on limitation grounds and would be heard on merits. The petition was disposed of accordingly. Case-Laws GST Tue, 22 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775550