As per the prosecution case, the petitioner, who was working as an assistant in the office of a Chartered Accountant and is also a law graduate, was allegedly involved in filing fake GST returns, generating fake invoices/e-way bills and preparing forged documents for the purpose of evasion of tax.

The petitioner challenged cancellation of GST registration on the ground that the cancellation order was arbitrary, non-speaking and passed without proper application of mind.

The petitioner challenged the demand order dated 27.04.2024 whereby tax, interest and penalty of ?21.11 lakh for FY 2018-19 was imposed. The petitioner also sought quashing of DRC-13 and defreezing of bank accounts.

The petitioner challenged retrospective cancellation of GST registration on the ground that no specific show cause notice was issued proposing retrospective cancellation.

Petitioner has approached this Court seeking following main substantial relief(s):-

The petitioner challenged the demand order dated 30.04.2024 on the ground that no proper show cause notice was issued before passing the order and only a summary notice in DRC-01 was served.

The petitioner challenged cancellation of GST registration on the ground of non-filing of returns within the prescribed period.

The petitioner challenged the demand order dated 13.11.2025 and the related DRC-07 and DRC-01 proceedings on the ground that no opportunity of personal hearing was granted before passing the order.

The petitioner challenged the demand orders for FY 2018-19 and FY 2020-21 on the ground that after cancellation of GST registration in 2021, the department uploaded show cause notices only on the GST portal without adopting any other mode of service.

The petitioner, acting as consignor, claimed to have supplied and transported 34,650 kgs of dried areca nuts pursuant to an order placed by M/s Barman Tradecomm, New Delhi (consignee).

The petitioner challenged the Order-in-Original dated 26 December 2025 and the rectification order dated 6 January 2026, whereby demand of tax, interest and penalty amounting to ?57,30,708/- was raised for the period April 2021 to March 2022.

The assessee filed a writ petition seeking additional payment for the differential GST after the rate on works contract services to a government authority increased from 12% to 18% with effect from 01.01.2022 under Central notifications. The assessee argued that the State’s policy granting differential GST using 18.07.2022 as the cut-off date was erroneous. The Court, on the revenue’s statement to reconsider the matter and take corrective steps if required, disposed of the petition directing completion within two months.