https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779265 HC dismissed the writ petition and relegated the petitioner to the statutory appellate remedy under the GST Act, holding that disputed claims of fraudulent input tax credit require factual inquiry by the appellate authority rather than the court. The court noted the petitioner paid 10% of the disputed tax during litigation and permitted resort to appeal. Time during which the writ petition was pending is to be excluded from limitation calculations, and the appellate authority must admit and decide the appeal without insisting on limitation objections. en-us Fri, 26 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 01 Oct 2025 09:07:53 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779265 HC dismissed the writ petition and relegated the petitioner to the statutory appellate remedy under the GST Act, holding that disputed claims of fraudulent input tax credit require factual inquiry by the appellate authority rather than the court. The court noted the petitioner paid 10% of the disputed tax during litigation and permitted resort to appeal. Time during which the writ petition was pending is to be excluded from limitation calculations, and the appellate authority must admit and decide the appeal without insisting on limitation objections. Case-Laws GST Fri, 26 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779265