https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781363 GSTAT, AT held that the DGAP's investigation could not be completed due to insufficient information despite multiple inquiries and a spot visit which indicated a different firm occupied the respondent's listed address. The Tribunal noted the department should verify whether the respondent engaged in bogus billing with any registered supplier and, if established, the jurisdictional commissionerate may take action under the CGST Act. Finding no basis to sustain further proceedings against the respondent, the Tribunal dropped the proceedings. en-us Wed, 12 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 14 Nov 2025 09:44:51 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781363 GSTAT, AT held that the DGAP's investigation could not be completed due to insufficient information despite multiple inquiries and a spot visit which indicated a different firm occupied the respondent's listed address. The Tribunal noted the department should verify whether the respondent engaged in bogus billing with any registered supplier and, if established, the jurisdictional commissionerate may take action under the CGST Act. Finding no basis to sustain further proceedings against the respondent, the Tribunal dropped the proceedings. Case-Laws GST Wed, 12 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781363