Facts of the Case
The
petitioner, Sardar Auto Traders, challenged an order dated 4 February 2025
issued in Form GST DRC-07 for Assessment Year 2017-18 under the CGST Act. The
investigation was initiated based on a reference from the Jaipur Zonal Unit of
the Directorate General of GST Intelligence. During investigation, it was
alleged that certain non-operational or non-existent firms were created for
fraudulent availment and passing on of input tax credit. Four entities, namely
M/s Sahni Traders, M/s M.R. Enterprises, M/s S K Traders and M/s Mahaveer
Impex, were found to have passed on ITC to 76 recipient firms, including the
petitioner. The ITC allegedly availed by the petitioner amounted to ₹1,48,333
comprising CGST of ₹74,166 and SGST of ₹74,166. A show cause notice dated 3
August 2024 was issued, to which the petitioner filed a reply on 4 August 2024.
Thereafter, an Order-in-Original dated 31 January 2025 was passed confirming
the demand and penalty under Section 74(9) of the CGST Act, followed by
issuance of DRC-07.
Issues Involved
Whether
the High Court should exercise writ jurisdiction in a case involving alleged
fraudulent availment of ITC as a recipient, whether parallel or overlapping
proceedings by Central and State GST authorities could be examined in writ
proceedings, and whether the petitioner ought to be relegated to the statutory
appellate remedy under Section 107 of the CGST Act.
Petitioner’s Arguments
The
petitioner contended that for the same assessment year, proceedings had already
been initiated and concluded by the Delhi GST authorities and that issuance of
notice and adjudication by the Central GST authorities resulted in duplication
and overlapping of demands. It was argued that such parallel proceedings were
impermissible and warranted interference by the High Court.
Respondent’s Arguments
The
Revenue submitted that the proceedings pertained to fraudulent availment of ITC
based on investigation by DGGI and that the impugned order was an appealable
order under Section 107 of the CGST Act. It was argued that disputed questions
of fact relating to fraudulent ITC could not be adjudicated in writ
jurisdiction and that the petitioner had an efficacious statutory remedy.
Court Order / Findings
The
Delhi High Court noted that the case related to alleged fraudulent availment of
ITC and that the impugned order was appealable under Section 107 of the CGST
Act. Relying on its earlier decision in Mukesh Kumar Garg vs Union of India,
the Court reiterated that writ jurisdiction should ordinarily not be exercised
in cases involving fraudulent ITC and bogus invoicing, which involve complex
factual analysis. The Court held that the petitioner’s grounds, including the
plea of overlapping demands, could be raised before the appellate authority.
Accordingly, the Court declined to entertain the writ petition.
Important Clarification
The
Court clarified that where allegations of fraudulent ITC are involved,
adjudication requires detailed factual examination which cannot be undertaken
under Article 226. The existence of an efficacious statutory appellate remedy
disentitles the petitioner from invoking writ jurisdiction, except in
exceptional circumstances.
Final Outcome
The
writ petition was disposed of. The petitioner was relegated to the statutory
remedy of appeal under Section 107 of the CGST Act and was granted time till 31
August 2025 to file the appeal along with the prescribed
pre-deposit. It was directed that if the appeal is filed within the said
period, it shall not be dismissed on the ground of limitation and shall be
decided on merits, with all pleas left open.
Link to Download Order https://www.mytaxexpert.co.in/uploads/1769497886_SARDARAUTOTRADERSVsADDITIONALCOMMISSIONERCGSTWARD32ZONE1ANDANR.pdf
Disclaimer
This content is shared strictly for general
information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify
the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal,
professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim
all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been
prepared with the assistance of AI tools.
0 Comments
Leave a Comment