<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2026 (10) TMI 243 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=800300</link>
    <description>Section 54(11) of the CGST Act permits withholding of a refund where the refund-generating order is subject to appeal, further proceedings, or another pending proceeding and, after hearing the taxable person, the Commissioner considers release harmful to revenue because of fraud or malfeasance. &quot;Other pending proceedings&quot; can include an ongoing statutory anti-evasion investigation, not only a formal appeal. Material indicating non-existent or cancelled suppliers, no established movement of goods, and no connection with the manufacturer&#039;s supply chain can support the required opinion concerning fraudulent input tax credit. A later show-cause notice may crystallise an existing investigation; no separate appellate proceeding or judicial stay is required for valid withholding.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 01 Oct 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Oct 2026 09:32:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=927602" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (10) TMI 243 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=800300</link>
      <description>Section 54(11) of the CGST Act permits withholding of a refund where the refund-generating order is subject to appeal, further proceedings, or another pending proceeding and, after hearing the taxable person, the Commissioner considers release harmful to revenue because of fraud or malfeasance. &quot;Other pending proceedings&quot; can include an ongoing statutory anti-evasion investigation, not only a formal appeal. Material indicating non-existent or cancelled suppliers, no established movement of goods, and no connection with the manufacturer&#039;s supply chain can support the required opinion concerning fraudulent input tax credit. A later show-cause notice may crystallise an existing investigation; no separate appellate proceeding or judicial stay is required for valid withholding.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 01 Oct 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=800300</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>