TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (5) TMI 1809
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... 26345/2025 & 26547/2025 (exemption) 2. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The applications stand disposed W.P.(C) 5771/2025 & CMAPPLs. 26344/2025 & 26546/2025 3. The present petitions have been filed by the Petitioners under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging, inter alia, the impugned order dated 03rd February, 2025 (hereinafter, 'the impugned order') wherein a demand has been raised against the Petitioners on the ground of availment of fraudulent Input Tax Credit (hereinafter, 'ITC'). 4. As per the show cause notice dated 01st August, 2024 (hereinafter, 'SCN') and impugned order dated 03rd February, 2025, one individual Sh. Mohit Jain is alleged to have orchestrated a network of various suppliers and got gen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ioners in the reply on the main issue i.e. that the goods were in fact supplied and ITC was rightly availed. 10. Further, in so far as the RUDs are concerned, this Court is of the opinion that RUDs are collected by the Department from various firms under investigation and whatever documents are available with the Department is what is collected from these firms and therefore, the Department cannot be expected to supply re-typed copies of the RUDs, considering that this could be extremely bulky in nature. 11. Coming to the issue of personal hearings being accorded to the Petitioner, the impugned order records as under: "10 Personal Hearing: 10.1 The Noticees as detailed in Table A,B.C and Table-Dabove were accorded opportunity of bein....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... present case, it is seen that the total number of entities who have been investigated and to whom notices have been issued are 146 in number. Hearings may in fact have been granted by the Department on different dates to various entities. In the impugned order itself, it is recorded clearly that almost none of the firms filed any reply to the SCN. 15. The impugned order is an appealable order under Section 107 of the CGST Act. The contentions that the Petitioners wish to raise can always be raised in appeal, in as much as this Court has already taken a view in W.P.(C) 5737/2025 titled Mukesh Kumar Garg vs. Union of India & Ors. 16. This Court, while deciding the above stated matter, has held that where cases involving fraudulent availmen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ividuals who had to deposit the output tax are themselves found to be not existent. Such misuse, if permitted to continue, would create an enormous dent in the GST regime itself. 14. As is seen in the present case, the Petitioner and his other family members are alleged to have incorporated or floated various firms and businesses only for the purposes of availing ITC without there being any supply of goods or services. The impugned order in question dated 30th January, 2025, which is under challenge, is a detailed order which consists of various facts as per the Department, which resulted in the imposition of demands and penalties. The demands and penalties have been imposed on a large number of firms and individuals, who were connected ....