Writ Petition Dismissed Over ITC Fraud and Lack of Clean Hands | HC

GST • News • Case Chronicles

ITC Fraud
Case Details: Aushta Enterprises Versus Union of India (2025) 31 Centax 219 (Del.)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

  • Pratibha M. Singh & Rajneesh Kumar Gupta, JJ.
  • Shri Sanjeev Anand, Sr. Adv., Ms Madhumita Singh & Ms Monica, Advs. for the Petitioner.
  • S/Shri Vinay Yadav, SPC, Ms Kamna Behrani, Ansh Kalra, Divyanshu Sinha, Dipak Raj, Subham Kumar, Ms Garima Kumar, Advs. & Anurag Ojha, SSC for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

M/s Aushta Enterprises, involved in fraudulent Input Tax Credit (ITC) claims through fake invoices, filed a writ petition challenging the denial of ITC. The company argued that they had not received the Show Cause Notice (SCN) or hearing notices, claiming a violation of natural justice. The petitioner, despite being aware of the investigation, failed to respond to the notices, attend hearings, or provide any proof of legitimate sales or transportation of goods. The Department presented evidence of email communications sent to the petitioner, but the petitioner claimed the emails went to the junk folder.

High Court Held

The High Court dismissed the writ petition, ruling that there was no violation of natural justice. The petitioner had been aware of the investigation and had multiple opportunities to respond but chose not to engage. The Court noted that the emails and hearing notices were indeed sent, and the petitioner’s failure to attend hearings and provide any explanations or evidence demonstrated lack of bona fides. The Court also emphasized that factual adjudication was required, which could not be conducted in writ jurisdiction. The petitioner was allowed to approach the Appellate Authority under Section 107 of the CGST Act for adjudication on merits, and the writ petition was dismissed.

List of Cases Cited

  • Asstt. Commissioner of State Tax v. Commercial Steel Ltd. — 2021 (52) G.S.T.L. 385 (S.C.) — Referred [Para 15]
  • Sheetal and Sons v. Union of India — [W.P. (C) No. 6441 of 2025, dated 15-5-2025] — Referred [Para 6]
  • Sunny Jagga v. Union of India — [W.P. (C) No. 6443 of 2025, dated 15-5-2025] — Referred [Para 6]
  • Vikas Traders v. Union of India — [W.P. (C) No. 6449 of 2025, dated 15-5-2025] — Referred [Para 6]

Leave Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Stories
No ITC on PEB Structure Steel & Cement for Crane Use | AAR

GST • News • Case Chronicles

June 24, 2025

GSTN Issues Guidance on Rejected Invoices in IMS

GST • News • Statutory Scope

June 21, 2025

Rule 36(4) CGST Not Arbitrary | Ensures ITC Compliance – HC

GST • News • Case Chronicles

June 20, 2025

Confiscation Not Justified for Excess Stock Alone | Allahabad HC

GST • News • Case Chronicles

June 19, 2025

Delhi Govt Makes Virtual Hearings Mandatory for All GST Cases

GST • News • Statutory Scope

June 18, 2025

E-Way Bill 2.0 Portal Launches on 1st July 2025 | GSTN Update

GST • News • Statutory Scope

June 18, 2025

Data Hosting to Foreign Affiliates Qualifies as Export of Service | HC

GST • News • Case Chronicles

June 17, 2025

SPL-01/SPL-02 Can Be Filed Despite Table 4 Mismatch | GSTN

GST • News • Statutory Scope

June 16, 2025

GSTN Offers Alternate Filing Route for Amnesty Applications u/s 128A

GST • News • Statutory Scope

June 13, 2025

GSTN Fixes Refund Filing Issue for QRMP Taxpayers

GST • News • Statutory Scope

June 13, 2025