JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH JUSTICE SHAIL JAIN Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)

1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

2. The present petition has been filed on behalf of the Petitioner-Samyak Jain under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, challenging the order dated 31st January, 2025 (hereinafter, the ‘impugned order’) passed by the Respondent No. 1- Superintendent (Adjudication), Central GST Delhi.

3. Vide the impugned order, a demand has been raised on the Petitioner for a sum of over Rs. 48 crores.

Signature Not Verified W.P.(C)9139/2025 Page1of5 Digitally Signed

4. ItisstatedthatthePetitionerwasregisteredundertheValueAddedTax (‘VAT’)regimeunderthetradingstyle,‘M/sSamyakInternational’.However, upon introduction of the Goods and Services Tax (‘GST’) regime, a provisional registration was allotted to ‘M/s Samyak International’, which according to the Petitioner, was not sought by him.

5. It is the case of the Petitioner that he had closed his business operations from 28th July, 2017 and had sought a new registration number under the nameof‘M/sSamyakFashion(India)’.However