https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466769 The primary issue was whether writ relief under Article 226 may be granted to challenge assessment and show-cause proceedings alleging fraudulent input tax credit, or whether the statutory appellate route under Section 107 of the CGST Act is the sole remedy. The court applied the principle that Article 226 is available only in exceptional circumstances (fundamental-rights breach, excess of jurisdiction, violation of natural justice, or vires challenge) and found none on the record; factual and evidentiary issues, interconnected transactions, and exchequer risk require appellate factfinding. Outcome: writ jurisdiction declined; petitioners relegated to statutory appeal with limited relief on pre-deposit/limitation to permit merits adjudication. en-us Fri, 05 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 18 Feb 2026 20:11:07 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466769 The primary issue was whether writ relief under Article 226 may be granted to challenge assessment and show-cause proceedings alleging fraudulent input tax credit, or whether the statutory appellate route under Section 107 of the CGST Act is the sole remedy. The court applied the principle that Article 226 is available only in exceptional circumstances (fundamental-rights breach, excess of jurisdiction, violation of natural justice, or vires challenge) and found none on the record; factual and evidentiary issues, interconnected transactions, and exchequer risk require appellate factfinding. Outcome: writ jurisdiction declined; petitioners relegated to statutory appeal with limited relief on pre-deposit/limitation to permit merits adjudication. Case-Laws GST Fri, 05 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466769