IMPORTANT POINT
The court affirmed that a statutory remedy under Section 107 of the CGST Act exists, thus not entertaining the writ petition under Article 226.

JUDGMENT :

The petitioner in the present writ petition, preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has assailed an Order-in-Original dated 06.09.2024 passed under Section 74 of the Central Goods and Services Tax [CGST] Act, 2017/Assam Goods and Services [AGST] Act, 2017 for the period : April, 2022 – March, 2024 and a Summary of the Order dated 06.09.2024 in Form GST DRC-07 under Rule 142[5] of the corresponding Rules by the respondent no. 4. A direction has also been sought for not to give effect to the impugned Order-in-Original dated 06.09.2024 and the Summary of the Order dated 06.09.2024.

2. The petitioner no. 2 carries out his business in coal under the name and style of petitioner no. 1 with a Certificate of GST Registration no. 18BMGPM0289L3Z1. The petitioner has averred that the petitioner is entitled to Input Tax Credit [ITC] in respect of purchase of coal under the provisions of the Central Goods and Services Tax [CGST] Act, 2017/Assam Goods and Services [AGST] Act, 2017. The petitioner has contended that all the refunds were duly sanctioned and disbursed after causing full enquiry and the respondent no. 4 is the jurisdictional officer in so far as causing enquiry in respect of the assessment of the petitioner is concerned and the petitioner is entitled to get refund of ITC on zero-rated supplies made by it.

3. The petitioner has stated that a Show Cause Notice under Section 61 of AGST Act, 2017 stood issued to it by the respondent no. 4 on 03.04.2023, followed by Form GST ASMT10 under Rule 99[1] of corresponding rules on 04.04.2023. By the said Show Cause Notice, the petitioner was directed to explain the reasons for the discrepancies noticed regarding excess ITC claim of Rs. 45,07,221.34 during the scrutiny of the return for the tax period from April, 2022 to March, 2023. In response to the said Show Cause Notice, the petitioner submitted a reply in Form GST ASMT-11 on 10.04.2023.

4. Thereafter, the respondent no. 3 on 08.04.2024 had issued a Demand –cum-Show Cause Notice under Section 74[1] of the AGST Act, 2017 for the periods : 2022-23 and 202324 and a Summary of Show Cause Notice dated 09.04.2024 in Form GST DRC-01 under Rule 100[2] and Rule 142[1][a] of the corresponding rules stating that the petitioner had claimed two erroneous refunds amounting to Rs. 1,11,23,972/-during the year : 2022-23 and 202324 in the following manner :-

[i] On 23.09.2022, the taxpayer claimed a refund of Rs. 34,30,591/-for the tax period from October 2021 to August 2022 by stating the reason of refund as ‘Refund of ITC on export goods and services without payment of tax’. Consequently, the refund was sanctioned on 29.09.2022 for Rs. 34,30,591/-[Rs. 15,70,591/-under IGST + Rs. 18,60,000/-under CESS].

[ii] On 13.03.2024, the taxpayer claimed another refund of Rs. 76,93,381/-for the tax period from September, 2022 to February, 2024 by stating the reason as ‘Refund of ITC on export goods and services without payment of tax’. Consequently, the refund was sanctioned on 13.03.2024 for Rs. 76,93,381/-[Rs. 34,03,781/-under IGST + Rs. 37,000/-under CGST + Rs. 37,000/- under SGST + Rs. 76,93,381/-under CESS].

4.1. The respondent no. 3 had further mentioned that upon verification, it was found that the petitioner had not received any ITC during the period from October, 2021 to February, 2024 against which the refund was claimed.

5. By the Demand –cum-Show Notice dated 08.04.2024, the Adjudicating Authority finding the alleged discrepancies/anomalies grave in nature posing serious threat to the interest of revenue, freezed the bank account of the petitioner bearing no. 916020065245871 as well as accounts bearing – A/c no. 916020080314082 & A/c no. 922020037714238 -of two other persons viz. Abdul Khalek and Sahida Bibi, all accounts maintained at Axis Bank, Dhubri Branch, had been freezed on and from 02.04.2024.

6. In response to the Demand –cum-Show Cause Notice dated 09.04.2024, the petitioner stated to have submitted a reply to the Show