TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (12) TMI 1189
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er is set out below: 5. Details of demand (Amount in Rs.) Sr. No Tax rate (%) Turr Place of supply Tax/Cess Interest Penalty Fee Others Total 1. 0 0.00 Delhi. CGST 938,448.50 0.00 938,448.50 0.00 0.00 1,876,897.00 2. 0 0.00 Delhi SGST 938,448.50 0.00 938,448.50 0.00 0.00 1,876,897.00 4. The case of the Department is that an investigation was conducted against 575 noticees in the jurisdiction of CGST North who had availed of fake Input Tax Credit (hereinafter, 'ITC') totalling to Rs. 13,16,16,906/-. The said ITC availment is alleged to have been facilitated by 16 fake firms. The names of the fake firms are as under: S.No. GSTIN Trade Name Legal Name Status 1 07AEIPA4804Q2ZB M/s Caretech System Anju Cancelled suo-moto 2 07AOHPY1000KIZY M/s Mahaveer Agencies Ramesh Yadav Cancelled suo-moto 3 07BKUPG0603EIZG M/s Brighten Sales Inc Ram Gopal Soni Cancelled on application of Taxpayer 4 07EHDPK3831BIZR M/s Blue Pearl Exports Darshan Kumar Cancelled on application of Taxpayer 5 07AAWHS395....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s heard ld. Counsels for the parties. A set of personal hearing notices dated 14th January, 2025 and 20th January, 2025 (hereinafter, 'personal hearing notices') have been handed across to the Court. 9. A perusal of the personal hearing notices would show that the personal hearing notices were emailed to the Petitioner on 15th January, 2025 at 2:49:02 PM on the email address [email protected] and on 21st January, 2025 at 4:27:54 PM at [email protected]. 10. Additionally, the GST portal print out has also been placed on record to show that this is the registered email address of Mr. Jai Kishan Bansal, the proprietor of the Petitioner, whose mobile no. is 9873256990. 11. Clearly, the filing of the present writ petition is without any basis. The Petitioner had a duty to reply to the impugned SCN as the investigation which was conducted by the Department was well within the knowledge of the Petitioner. 12. Further, even after passing of the impugned order, the present writ petition was listed on 30th May, 2025 which is the last day when the three plus one month limitation period, in terms of Section 107(4) of the CGST Act. Issue of Consolidated SCN 13. Moreover, ins....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ut tax credit wrongly availed or utilised for such periods other than those covered under sub-section (1), on the person chargeable with tax. (4) The service of statement under sub-section (3) shall be deemed to be service of notice under sub-section (1) of section 73, subject to the condition that the grounds relied upon in the said statement, except the ground of fraud, or any wilful-misstatement or suppression of facts to evade tax, for periods other than those covered under sub-section (1) are the same as are mentioned in the earlier notice." 44. Some of the other provisions of the CGST Act, which are relevant, include Section 2(106) of the CGST Act, which defines "tax period" as under "2.[...] (106) "tax period" means the period for which the return is required to be furnished" 45. Thus, Sections 74(3), 74(4), 73(3) and 73(4) of the CGST Act use the term "for any period" and "for such periods". This would be in contrast with the language used in Sections 73(10) and 74(10) of the CGST Act where the term "financial year" is used. The said provisions read as under: "73.[...] (10) The proper officer shall issue the order under sub-secti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....unts for various years 15. Insofar as the reflection of the tax amounts for the various years are concerned, the DRC-01 which was accompanying the impugned SCN itself specifically gives all amounts for all the years separately in the following terms: (c) Tax and other dues: Financial Year: 2017-2018 Tax period SI.No. HSN Turnover Rate of Tax From To Place of Supply (POS) Act (Rs.) Tax/Cess (Rs.) Interest (Rs.) Penalty (Rs.) Fee (Rs.) Others (Rs.) Total (Rs.) Month Year Month Year 1 2 3 4 5 7 00 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 86080040 0 JUL 2017 MAR 2018 CGST 357161 0 357161 0 0 714322 2 86080040 0 JUL 2017 MAR 2018 SGST 357161 0 357161 0 0 7....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....or different levels of officers of central tax need to be prescribed. Therefore, in pursuance of clause (91) of section 2 of the CGST Act read with section 20 of the IGST Act, the Board hereby assigns the officers mentioned in Column (2) of the Table below, the functions as the proper officers in relation to issue of show cause notices and orders under sections 73 and 74 of the CGST Act and section 20 of the IGST Act (read with sections 73 and 74 of the CGST Act), up to the monetary limits as mentioned in columns (3), (4) and (5) respectively of the Table below:- Sl.No. Officer of Central tax Monetary limit of the amount of central tax (including cess) not paid or short paid or erroneously refunded or input tax credit of central tax wrongly availed or utilized for issuance of show cause notices and passing of orders under sections 73 and 74 of CGST Act. Monetary limit of the amount of integrated tax (including cess) not paid or short paid or erroneously refunded or input tax credit of integrated tax wrongly availed or utilized for issuance of show cause notices and passing of orders under sections 73 and 74 of CGST Act made applicable to matters in relation to integrate....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the show cause-notice(s), by one of the Additional/Joint Commissioners of Central Tax empowered with All India jurisdiction vide the above mentioned notifications. Principal Commissioners/ Commissioners of the Central Tax Commissionerates specified in the said notification will allocate charge of Adjudication (DGGI cases) to one or more Additional Commissioners/ Joint Commissioners posted in their Commissionerates. Where the location of principal place of business of the noticee, having the highest amount of demand of tax in the said show cause-notice(s), falls under the jurisdiction of a Central Tax Zone/Commissionerate mentioned in column 2 of the table below, the show cause-notice(s) may be adjudicated by one of the Additional Commissioners/ Joint Commissioners of Central Tax, holding the charge of Adjudication (DGGI cases), of the Central Tax Commissionerate mentioned in column 3 of the said table corresponding to the said Central Tax Zone/Commissionerate. Such show cause notice(s) may, accordingly, be made answerable by the officers of DGGI to the concerned Additional/ Joint Commissioners of Central Tax". 19. From the above, it is clear that when there are multiple parties ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ability of a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. But a writ petition can be entertained in exceptional circumstances where there is: (i) a breach of fundamental rights; (ii) a violation of the principles of natural justice; (iii) an excess of jurisdiction; or (iv) a challenge to the vires of the statute or delegated legislation. 12. In the present case, none of the above exceptions was established. There was, in fact, no violation of the principles of natural justice since a notice was served on the person in charge of the conveyance. In this backdrop, it was not appropriate for the High Court to entertain a writ petition. The assessment of facts would have to be carried out by the appellate authority. As a matter of fact, the High Court has while doing this exercise proceeded on the basis of surmises. However, since we are inclined to relegate the respondent to the pursuit of the alternate statutory remedy under Section 107, this Court makes no observation on the merits of the case of the respondent. 13. For the above reasons, we allow the appeal and set aside the impugned order of the High Court. The writ peti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....position of demands and penalties. The demands and penalties have been imposed on a large number of firms and individuals, who were connected in the entire maze and not just the Petitioner. 15. The impugned order is an appealable order under Section 107 of the CGST Act. One of the co-noticees, who is also the son of the Petitioner i.e. Mr. 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 his firm or whether penalty is liable to be imposed under Section 122(1) and Section 122(3) of the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....business transactions. The same is meant as an incentive for businesses who need not pay taxes on the inputs, which have already been taxed at the source itself. The said facility, which was introduced under Section 16 of the CGST Act is a major feature of the GST regime, which is business friendly and is meant to enable ease of doing business. 13. It is observed by this Court in a large number 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 detailed order which consists of various facts ....