<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2025 (8) TMI 475 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776288</link>
    <description>The HC dismissed the petition challenging the notice for fraudulent availment of Input Tax Credit (ITC) involving non-operational or fictitious suppliers. The Court held that writ petitions are generally not maintainable in such cases, referencing prior precedent. It emphasized that the petitioner should pursue appellate remedies, as the impugned order is appealable and the issues can be addressed before the Appellate Authority. The petition was disposed of accordingly.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 31 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 07 Aug 2025 07:05:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=841531" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (8) TMI 475 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776288</link>
      <description>The HC dismissed the petition challenging the notice for fraudulent availment of Input Tax Credit (ITC) involving non-operational or fictitious suppliers. The Court held that writ petitions are generally not maintainable in such cases, referencing prior precedent. It emphasized that the petitioner should pursue appellate remedies, as the impugned order is appealable and the issues can be addressed before the Appellate Authority. The petition was disposed of accordingly.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 31 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776288</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>