2025 (5) TMI 2075

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....86/2025 & CMAPPL. 32365/2025 3. The present petition has been filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the impugned order dated 31st January, 2025 (hereinafter, 'impugned order') whereby a penalty has been imposed upon the Petitioner in the following terms: "xii. a) I impose penalty of Rs. 1,03,80,024/- upon M/s Standard Cartons Pvt Ltd (GSTIN07AAECS1153P1Z3), B-101, Okhla Industrial Area, Phase-1, South Delhi, Delhi- 110020 under Section 122 (1) (vii) along with Section 122 (2) (b) of the CGST Act, 2017 read with the corresponding provisions of the SGST Act, 2017 and Section 20 of the IGST Act, 2017 for receiving invoices or bills without actual supply of goods or services from the firms of Late Mrs. Aa....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....etitioner. 7. The submission made today by the ld. Counsel for Petitioner is that despite the directions for furnishing the Relied Upon Documents (hereinafter, 'RUDs'), the same were not furnished to the Petitioner until the filing of a contempt petition. It is further submitted that in the RUDs, the statement of one Mr. Vinod Pahwa would show that he does not have any connection with the Petitioner. Thus, there is no document which connects the Petitioner to Mr. Vinod Pahwa or to Mrs. Aaurti Kapoor. Ld. Counsel for the Petitioner, therefore, submits that the order deserves to be quashed. 8. On the other hand, ld. Counsel for the Respondent-Department has pointed out that the GSTR-1M of the various firms of Mrs. Aaurti Kapoor would show t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....h it being ensured that all the documents relied upon are duly provided to the writ petitioner. 4. Subject to the aforesaid observation, this writ petition stands disposed of." 11. The grievance of the Petitioner is that despite this order dated 4th November, 2024, the RUDs were not supplied to the Petitioner and the same were furnished only on 14th May, 2025. 12. In the opinion of this Court, the Petitioner has all along been aware of the proceedings before the Adjudicating Authority. The same SCN dated 2nd August, 2024 was challenged by one M/s SS Enterprises in petition being W.P.(C) 5684/2025 in which the Petitioner therein was relegated to avail of the appellate remedy in accordance with law. 13. The contentions that the Petitio....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....mber of writ petitions that this facility under Section 16 of the CGST Act has been misused by various individuals, firms, entities and companies to avail of ITC even when the output tax is not deposited or when the entities or individuals 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 detai....