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Your email address will not be published.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
GSTN Upgrades GSTR-3B Interest and Tax Reporting from Jan 2026

GST • News • Statutory Scope

February 1, 2026

Common Director Not Ground to Lift Corporate Veil | HC

GST • News • Case Chronicles

January 31, 2026

GST Appeal Allowed Despite Delay Due to Illness | HC

GST • News • Case Chronicles

January 30, 2026

HC Orders Reconsideration of Excess ITC Denial on Imports

GST • News • Case Chronicles

January 30, 2026

Bail Granted After Prolonged Custody Before Trial | SC

GST • News • Case Chronicles

January 29, 2026

Refund Cannot Be Rejected After Eligibility Accepted | HC

GST • News • Case Chronicles

January 28, 2026

GSTN Advisory On RSP Based Valuation Of Tobacco Under GST

GST • News • Statutory Scope

January 27, 2026

Writ Not Maintainable Against SCN Under GST | SC

GST • News • Case Chronicles

January 24, 2026

Writ Not Maintainable Against SCN Under Section 74 | SC

GST • News • Case Chronicles

January 23, 2026

Refund Of Statutory Pre-Deposit Becomes Vested Right | SC

GST • News • Case Chronicles

January 22, 2026