https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776049 The HC held that the petition challenging the demand of Rs.56,26,764/- for fraudulent availment of Input Tax Credit was not maintainable due to the availability of an alternative remedy. Since factual issues required detailed examination, the petitioner was directed to approach the appellate authority. The court noted that some parties had admitted liability and deposited the ITC, while others contested and had orders passed by the Adjudicating Authority. The writ petition was dismissed as unsuitable, and the petitioner was allowed to file an appeal by 31st August 2025, which would be heard on merits without limitation objections. en-us Mon, 28 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 04 Aug 2025 08:28:10 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776049 The HC held that the petition challenging the demand of Rs.56,26,764/- for fraudulent availment of Input Tax Credit was not maintainable due to the availability of an alternative remedy. Since factual issues required detailed examination, the petitioner was directed to approach the appellate authority. The court noted that some parties had admitted liability and deposited the ITC, while others contested and had orders passed by the Adjudicating Authority. The writ petition was dismissed as unsuitable, and the petitioner was allowed to file an appeal by 31st August 2025, which would be heard on merits without limitation objections. Case-Laws GST Mon, 28 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776049