M/S. Haji Stores vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of CGST And C.Ex.
Held
The Court found that the petitioner had suppressed the fact that final orders were already passed against them. Therefore, the representation and the subsequent writ petition were considered devoid of merit.
Facts
The petitioner's Electronic Credit Ledger (ECL) was blocked due to alleged use of fake invoices for Input Tax Credit (ITC). The petitioner submitted a representation to unblock the ECL, but it remained unconsidered. However, the respondent stated that final orders had already been passed against the petitioner.
Key Issues
Whether a writ of mandamus can be issued to consider a representation when final orders have already been passed, and whether the petitioner suppressed material facts.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORDER This Writ Petition has been filed seeking a mandamus directing the respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 07.06.2025 within a stipulated time. 1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.34658 of 2025
The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner's Electronic Credit Ledger (ECL) was blocked on 23.01.2020 citing the reason that the petitioner used fake invoices to file Input Tax Credit
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Madras High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.