TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (7) TMI 1131
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in the following terms: " ORDER (i) I hereby denied Input Tax Credit (ITC) amounting to Rs. 26,95,895/- wrongly availed and utilized by the taxpayer and confirm the demand of inadmissible ITC ineligible Input Tax Credit amounting to Rs. 26,95,895/- from the taxpayer under Section 74 (1) of the CGST Act, 2017 read with Section 20 of IGST Act, 2017; (ii) I hereby confirm the demand of Interest on aforementioned inadmissible availed ITC demanded in point (i) from the taxpayer at applicable rate(s) under Section 50 of CGST Act 2017 read with the DGST Act, 2017 and IGST Act, 2017 (iii) I hereby confirm the equivalent penalty of Rs. 26,95,895/- from the taxpayer under Section 122 (1) (vii), (x) and (xvi) and Section 122 (2)(b) read with....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....id judgement reads as under: "11. The Court has considered the matter under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, which is an exercise of extraordinary writ jurisdiction. The allegations against the Petitioner in the impugned order are extremely serious in nature. They reveal the complex maze of transactions, which are alleged to have been carried out between various non-existent firms for the sake of enabling fraudulent availment of the ITC. 12. The entire concept of Input Tax Credit, as recognized under Section 16 of the CGST Act is for enabling businesses to get input tax on the goods and services which are manufactured/supplied by them in the chain of business transactions. The same is meant as an incentive for businesses who n....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r. Anuj Garg, has already appealed before the Appellate Authority. 16. Insofar as exercise of writ jurisdiction itself is concerned, it is the settled position that this jurisdiction ought not be exercised by the Court to support the unscrupulous litigants. 17. Moreover, when such transactions are entered into, a factual analysis would be required to be undertaken and the same cannot be decided in writ jurisdiction. The Court, in exercise of its writ jurisdiction, cannot adjudicate upon or ascertain the factual aspects pertaining to what was the role played by the Petitioner, whether the penalty imposed is justified or not, whether the same requires to be reduced proportionately in terms of the invoices raised by the Petitioner under ....