JUDGMENT :

J.B. PARDIWALA, J.

1. By this writ application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the writ applicant, a dealer and an assessee under the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (for short, "the VAT Act"), has prayed for the following reliefs:

"A. This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of certiorari or writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ or order quashing and setting aside impugned order dated 17.6.2021 (annexed at Annexure A) passed by the Gujarat Value Added Tax Tribunal in Second Appeal No. 327 of 2020 and the Tribunal may please be directed to admit the second appeal and grant stay against recovery of dues without insisting for any pre-deposit;

B. In the alternative this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of certiorari or writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ or order quashing and setting aside impugned order dated 17.6.2021 (annexed at Annexure A) as well as the first appeal order dated 5.9.2020 (annexed at Annexure H) and assessment order dated 10.3.2016 (annexed at Annexure B) and the matter may please be remanded to the assessing authority i.e. respondent No. 3 for fresh assessment after giving due show cause notice and proper opportunity of hearing to the petitioner;

C. Pending notice, admission and final hearing of this petition, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to stay coercive recovery against the petitioner pursuant to the assessment order dated 10.3.2016 passed by the respondent No. 3;

C1. The impugned order dated 15th December 2021 (annexed at Annexure L) may please be quashed and set aside and the matter may please be remanded to the Tribunal/assessing authority without any requirement of pre-deposit or security;

D. Ex-parte ad interim relief in terms of prayer C may kindly be granted;

E. Such further relief(s) as deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be granted in the interest of justice for which of kindness your petitioner shall forever pray.

E1. The impugned order dated 15.12.2021 (annexed at Annexure L) dismissing the second appeal filed by the petitioner is consequent to the non-compliance of order dated 17.6.2021 and since the order dated 17.6.2021 is bad and illegal for the aforementioned grounds, the consequential order dated 15.12.2021 is also bad and illegal."

2. The facts giving rise to this writ application may be summarized as under:

3. The writ applicant is a partnership firm. The firm is engaged in the business of reselling laboratory chemicals. It is not in dispute that the firm is registered under the VAT Act.

4. During the year 2011-12, the firm purchased goods from M/s. Nirmal Trading and M/s. I.B. Sulphonator respectively, and thereafter, such goods came to be resold by the firm. The vendor issued tax invoices for the sales to the firm and the firm, in turn, claimed Input Tax Credit under the VAT Act for the tax period pursuant to such tax invoices.

5. It appears from the materials on record that without issuing any show cause notice, the assessing authority straightway proceeded to pass the assessment order disallowing a huge amount of Input Tax Credit on the ground of "unreconciled input tax credit".

6. The writ applicant, being dissatisfied and aggrieved by such assessment order, preferred an appeal under Section 73 of the VAT Act before the first Appellate Authority. It appears that the first Appellate Authority, having regard to a strong prima facie case, admitted the appeal and also granted stay against the recovery pursuant to the assessment order subject to pre-deposit of an amount of Rs. 1 Lakh.

7. It is the case of the firm that the first Appellate Authority intended to allow the appeal and in such circumstances, the file of the firm was sent to the G.R. Cell in accordance with the procedure prescribed by the circular dated 30th July 2016. It appears that based on the suggestions by the G.R. Cell, again, a notice 23rd October 2019 came to be issued to the firm calling upon the f