The Delhi High Court has refused to entertain a writ petition challenging a tax demand and penalty order in a case involving alleged fraudulent availment of Input Tax Credit (ITC) through bogus invoicing during the 2017–18 financial year. The Court directed the petitioner to avail the statutory appellate remedy instead.
The bench of Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Shail Jain passed the order in a matter linked to an investigation initiated by the Jaipur Zonal Unit of the Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI). The investigation had uncovered that multiple fictitious firms were created to issue fake invoices and wrongfully pass on ITC. Among the 76 recipients of such ITC was the petitioner, who allegedly availed ₹1,48,333 in ITC without receiving any actual supply of goods.
The order was challenged on the grounds that another proceeding by the Delhi GST Department had already concluded for the same assessment year, and hence, parallel proceedings by the Central GST authorities were not permissible.
The Court, however, held that in cases of serious fraud involving complex financial transactions, constitutional writ jurisdiction under Article 226 is not appropriate. It relied on its prior decision in Mukesh Kumar Garg v. Union of India, which held that appellate remedies must be exhausted where fraudulent ITC claims are alleged.
“This jurisdiction ought not be exercised to support unscrupulous litigants,” the Court stated, adding that the matter involved factual disputes which could not be resolved through writ proceedings.
Acknowledging the possibility that the limitation period for appeal may have lapsed, the Court granted time until August 31, 2025, for the petitioner to file an appeal before the Appellate Tribunal along with the required pre-deposit. It clarified that any such appeal would be heard on merits and not dismissed as time-barred.
The petition and pending applications were accordingly dismissed.
Case Details
Case Title: Sardar Auto Traders Versus Additional Commissioner CGST Ward 32, Zone 1 And Anr
Case No.: W.P.(C) 10518/2025 & CM APPL. 43634/2025
Date: 31/07/2025
Counsel For Petitioner: Wahaj Ahmad Khan, Adv.
Counsel For Respondent: Aakarsh Srivastava, Senior Standing Counsel
Read More: GST Registration Can Be Restored If Dues Are Cleared: Gauhati High Court
