1. Questioning the provisional order of attachment issued under Section 83 of the WBGST/CGST Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act), dated 13th April, 2023 passed by the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, the instant writ petition has been filed.

Impugned in this petition filed by the petitioner-Bank is a show-cause notice issued by the Commissioner Central Goods and Services Tax, Jammu dated 30.11.2024 whereby, the petitioner-Bank has been called upon to show cause as to why an action may not be taken against it under the provision of Jammu and Kashmir GST Act, 2017 or the rules made thereunder or any other law for the time being in force

This petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution assails the show cause notice dated 01.11.2024 whereby the petitioner’s registration was suspended with effect from 01.11.2024. The petitioner is also aggrieved by the final order of cancellation of registration dated 16.01.2025.

With reference to your order rejecting the refund claim on the grounds of time limitation under Section 54 of the CGST Act, 2017, we hereby submit our response for reconsideration of the claim:

Reply to Intimation Notice Reference No. MA080325017309Z Dated 06.03.2025 – Clarification on Interest Liability

Request for Unblocking of ITC for FY 2023-24 – Retrospective Cancellation of Supplier’s GST Registration

Request for Unblocking of ITC Wrongly Blocked Under Rule 86A – RCM Liability Not Paid and No ITC Availed

Request for Withdrawal of Appeal Filed Against Disallowance Under Section 16(4) to Avail Amnesty Scheme Under Section 128A

Response to Show Cause Notice Issued Under Section 74 of the CGST Act, 2017 for ITC Mismatch Between GSTR-3B and GSTR-2A for FY

The petitioners challenged an interim order allowing GST adjudication to proceed while restraining the final order’s enforcement. They sought modification based on a subsequent Supreme Court ruling staying similar show-cause notices. The High Court refused to interfere but granted liberty to seek modification before the Single Bench in light of the SC’s ruling.

The petitioner challenged GST proceedings for FY 2017-18 under the U.P. GST Act, arguing they were time-barred under Section 73(10). The High Court relied on a previous ruling in M/s A.V. Pharma vs. State of U.P., which held that the limitation period expired on 05.02.2023. Since the impugned orders are passed beyond this period, they are quashed as without jurisdiction.

The petitioners challenged the imposition of GST on the assignment of leasehold rights of land allotted by MIDC. They relied on the Gujarat High Court ruling, which held that such assignments involve immovable property and are not taxable under GST. The court found the issue significant and stayed the adjudication of pending show cause notices and orders for the petitioners. The matter is tagged with similar cases for final hearing and disposal.