Order on Board

1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following relief(s):-

10.1 Issue a Writ of Certiorari or a Writ in the nature of Certiorari, or any other appropriate Writ, Order or directions and call for records and proceedings leading to passing of the Impugned Order and Impugned Rectification Order passed by Respondent No. 3;

10.2 Issue a Writ of Certiorari or a Writ in the nature of Certiorari, or any other appropriate Writ, Order or directions and quashing the Impugned Order dated 28.08.2024 (Annexure P-1) passed by Respondent No. 3, since the same is in violation of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the Respondent No. 3 to re-credit the amount of tax in the Electronic Credit Ledger of the Petitioner which was illegally debited by Respondent No. 3 and direct to de-freeze the bank account of the Petitioner;

10.3 Issue a Writ of Certiorari or a Writ in the nature of Certiorari, or any other appropriate Writ, Order of directions and quashing the Impugned Rectification Order dated 07.10.2025 (Annexure P-2) passed by Respondent No. 3, since the same is ex-facie bad in law, non-speaking and in violation of principles of natural justice;

10.4 Issue a Writ of Mandamus or a Writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, Order or directions, restraining the Respondent No. 3 from initiating any further coercive action against the Petitioner under the CGST Act, 2017;

10.5 That any other relief which this Hon’ble Court may deem just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be issued in favour of the petitioners along with the cost of the petition.”

2. The facts in brief are that the petitioner is a sole proprietorship registered the GST laws in the State of Chhattisgarh. It is engaged in the wholesale and retail business of various agricultural products. On 29.04.2024, respondent No. 3 scrutinized the return of the petitioner and issued a notice in Form GST ASMT-10 alleging various discrepancies in the return for the Financial Year 2019-20. On 30.05.2024 respondent No. 3 issued a show cause notice in Form GST DRC-01 proposing a demand of GST to the tune of Rs.33,96,162/- along with interest and penalty for the period of April 2019 to March 2020 under Section 73 of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (for short ‘CGST Act’). Respondent No. 3 passed order impugned on 28.08.2024 in Form GST DRC-07 confirming the entire demand of GST to the tune of Rs.64,94,320/-. Respondent No. 3 proceeded to recover the amount of demand on 21.01.2025 and thereafter the petitioner filed rectification application under Section 161 of the CGST Act on 02.03.2025. In between bank account of the petitioner was attached and the application moved by the petitioner for rectification was rejected vide order dated 07.10.2025.

3. Ms. Arya Mittal, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would argue that the petitioner was not afforded any opportunity of hearing and therefore, the orders impugned are violative of doctrine of audi alteram partem. She would submit that grant of opportunity to file a reply does not and cannot substitute mandatory requirement of personal hearing. She would further submit that according to the provisions of Section 75 (4) of CGST Act, an opportunity of hearing should have been granted to the petitioner. She would contend that the order Annexure- P-1 has been issued by the same authority and same person, therefore, same is illegal. It is further argued that the impugned rectification order is non-speaking, vague and cryptic in nature and, thus, liable to be quashed. It is also contended that the petitioner does not have any other alternative and efficacious remedy. She would pray to allow this petition.

4. Per contra, Ms. Anuradha Jain, learned Deputy Government Advocate appearing for the State/respondents No. 2 and 3 would submit that the present writ petition is liable to be dismissed on the ground of delay and laches. It is submitted that an appeal