Mukesh Kumar Garg Vs Union Of India & Ors. (Delhi High Court)

Delhi High Court didn’t entertain the writ petition in the matter of fraudulent availment of Input Tax Credit without actual supply of goods or services since appellate remedy under section 107 of the CGST Act available.Facts- The case of the Department is that two individuals namely Mr. Anuj Garg and his father Mr. Mukesh Kumar Garg i.e. the Petitioner had incorporated or established 28 firms. Thereafter, in collusion with various other traders the Petitioner had availed of fake Input Tax Credit without any supply of goods or services.As stated in the SCN, the Department conducted a detailed investigation against the said firms and their promoters/directors. Various documents were analysed. Statements of several persons, who were associated with these two individuals, were also recorded.According to the Department, the total ITC, which was availed of by the entity, which was controlled by Mr. Anuj Garg, who is the son of Mr. Mukesh Kumar Garg is to the tune of Rs.1,15,73,68,714/-. A detailed order has been passed by the Respondent No.3 after issuance of the SCN. The Petitioner had also filed a reply to the said SCN. Personal hearing was also granted to the Petitioner. In the impugned order, penalties have been imposed on the Petitioner by the Respondent No. 3. The Petitioner i.e. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Garg, assails the impugned order on various grounds.Conclusion- Considering the fact that the Petitioner’s son has already availed of the appellate remedy under Section 107 of the CGST Act in respect of the same very impugned order dated 30th January, 2025, this Court is of the opinion that the present writ petition ought not to be entertained, especially considering the seriousness of allegations against the Petitioner.It is well settled in various decisions of the Supreme Court that petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India would be liable to be entertained only in case of persons who come with clean hands and not in favour of the persons who present twisted facts or misrepresent the true and correct picture on record.Held that this Court is of the view that the present writ petition is not liable to be entertained. If the Petitioner wishes to urge any other issues, the same can be considered in the appeal, if the Petitioner chooses to avail of the appellate remedy under Section 107 of the CGST Act.