2026-VIL-1237-DEL

SGST High Court Cases

GST - Writ jurisdiction against order under Section 74 - Alternative remedy of appeal - Petitioner challenged an order-in-original confirming demand under Section 74 in relation to alleged availment and passing on of ineligible Input Tax Credit through invoices unsupported by genuine supplies, in a network of firms investigated by the Department. The Petitioner contended that the SCN was non-speaking and omitted vital particulars required to invoke Section 74 - Whether the writ petition against the order can be entertained when a statutory remedy of appeal is available and the SCN is alleged to be non-speaking - HELD - The existence of an alternative statutory remedy does not bar the exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226, but where the statute provides a mechanism to challenge orders, the writ court ordinarily exercises restraint. The mere use of expressions such as fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression of facts is insufficient to invoke Section 74, and the factual basis must be discernible from the SCN itself - The SCN in the present case is a common notice running into nearly eighty pages and contains a detailed account of the alleged transactions and the modus operandi involving multiple firms. The fact that the notice is common to several noticees does not render it deficient, and the number of noticees by itself does not establish the liability of any individual noticee. The Adjudicating Authority passed the order after considering the reply of the Petitioner. The Petitioner can urge before the appellate authority that the notice or the material relied upon does not satisfy the requirements of Section 74 - The Court does not interfere in writ jurisdiction, the Petitioner is relegated to the statutory remedy of appeal and no final opinion is expressed on the merits – The petition is disposed of

Create Account



Log In



Forgot Password


Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page



Feedback this page