https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783649 The dominant issue was whether writ jurisdiction should be exercised to quash adjudication alleging fraudulent availment of fake ITC on grounds of breach of natural justice, invalid consolidated SCN, and lack of jurisdiction. The HC held that non-filing of a reply to the SCN despite knowledge of the investigation disentitled the petitioner to invoke natural justice, and service of personal hearing notices by email to the registered address was duly effected; the contrary plea was found false. It further held that a consolidated SCN covering multiple financial years is permissible under the CGST Act, and that in multi-noticee matters adjudicatory jurisdiction lies with the commissionerate linked to the highest proposed demand, consistent with the relevant circular. Given the fact-intensive nature of fake ITC disputes and availability of statutory appeal, the writ was dismissed with exemplary costs. en-us Fri, 12 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 19 Dec 2025 08:30:25 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783649 The dominant issue was whether writ jurisdiction should be exercised to quash adjudication alleging fraudulent availment of fake ITC on grounds of breach of natural justice, invalid consolidated SCN, and lack of jurisdiction. The HC held that non-filing of a reply to the SCN despite knowledge of the investigation disentitled the petitioner to invoke natural justice, and service of personal hearing notices by email to the registered address was duly effected; the contrary plea was found false. It further held that a consolidated SCN covering multiple financial years is permissible under the CGST Act, and that in multi-noticee matters adjudicatory jurisdiction lies with the commissionerate linked to the highest proposed demand, consistent with the relevant circular. Given the fact-intensive nature of fake ITC disputes and availability of statutory appeal, the writ was dismissed with exemplary costs. Case-Laws GST Fri, 12 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783649