https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784121 In a challenge to a GST order alleging fraudulent availment of ITC, the HC held that writ jurisdiction is ordinarily not exercised in such matters because they involve disputed facts, complex transactions, and voluminous evidence better examined in statutory appeal; the petitioner's reply to the SCN was found vague and non-responsive to the allegations, warranting relegation to the appellate forum. Although the petitioner alleged denial of personal hearing, the HC declined to set aside the order in writ and instead protected the right of appeal by directing that, if an appeal is filed with the requisite pre-deposit by 31.01.2026, it shall not be rejected as time-barred and must be decided on merits. en-us Tue, 23 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 27 Dec 2025 14:00:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784121 In a challenge to a GST order alleging fraudulent availment of ITC, the HC held that writ jurisdiction is ordinarily not exercised in such matters because they involve disputed facts, complex transactions, and voluminous evidence better examined in statutory appeal; the petitioner's reply to the SCN was found vague and non-responsive to the allegations, warranting relegation to the appellate forum. Although the petitioner alleged denial of personal hearing, the HC declined to set aside the order in writ and instead protected the right of appeal by directing that, if an appeal is filed with the requisite pre-deposit by 31.01.2026, it shall not be rejected as time-barred and must be decided on merits. Case-Laws GST Tue, 23 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784121