https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782897 HC declined to exercise writ jurisdiction in a GST dispute involving alleged fraudulent availment of ITC, holding that such matters typically require factual adjudication through the statutory appellate mechanism. Although the Petitioner alleged violation of natural justice and error in DRC-07 due to non-service of SCN, the Court found that an email intimation was received and any defect in DRC-07 was merely inadvertent and not fatal. Treating the grievance as one fit for appeal under Section 107 CGST Act, HC permitted the Petitioner to file an appeal against the order and DRC-07 by 15 January 2026, directing that it be entertained on merits without being rejected as time-barred. en-us Mon, 01 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 04 Dec 2025 11:32:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782897 HC declined to exercise writ jurisdiction in a GST dispute involving alleged fraudulent availment of ITC, holding that such matters typically require factual adjudication through the statutory appellate mechanism. Although the Petitioner alleged violation of natural justice and error in DRC-07 due to non-service of SCN, the Court found that an email intimation was received and any defect in DRC-07 was merely inadvertent and not fatal. Treating the grievance as one fit for appeal under Section 107 CGST Act, HC permitted the Petitioner to file an appeal against the order and DRC-07 by 15 January 2026, directing that it be entertained on merits without being rejected as time-barred. Case-Laws GST Mon, 01 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782897