M/S Kunal Ett Udyog vs. The Union Of INDIA

Held

The Court held that the present writ application is fully covered by the order dated 13.03.2026 passed by a coordinate bench in M/s King Bricks versus State of Bihar. Consequently, the impugned order DRC-07 dated 07.02.2024 (though the fact stated in the facts section mentions 09.02.2024, the operative part mentions 07.02.2024, likely a typo in the judgment) relating to the assessment year 2020-21 and the demand notice of CGST dated 07.02.2024 are set aside. The matter is remitted back to the Assessing Authority to undertake fresh steps for passing a fresh order strictly in accordance with the provisions of the Bihar Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017, and in light of the cited judgment, after providing an adequate opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. A final order is to be passed within six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The order of attachment of the petitioner's bank account is also quashed.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Kunal ETT Udyog, a sole proprietorship engaged in the brick kiln business, filed a writ petition challenging an order of assessment (DRC-07) dated 09.02.2024 and a CGST demand notice dated 09.02.2024 for the assessment year 2021-22. The petitioner argued that the assessment was made on an estimated basis. The petitioner's counsel cited a coordinate bench's decision in M/s King Bricks versus State of Bihar (C.W.J.C. No. 8948 of 2025), where a similar matter was remanded for fresh assessment after granting an adequate opportunity of hearing. The respondents did not dispute this submission. The petition also sought the release of the petitioner's attached bank account.

Key Issues

1. Whether the assessment order and demand notice, passed on an estimated basis without granting adequate opportunity of hearing, are liable to be set aside? (Question of law and fact, turning on principles of natural justice and assessment procedures under the GST Act). Petitioner's arguments: The assessment was made on an estimated basis. The matter is squarely covered by the decision in M/s King Bricks versus State of Bihar, where a similar writ petition was allowed, and the matter was remanded for fresh assessment after providing an adequate opportunity of hearing. The impugned orders should be set aside, and the bank account attachment quashed. Revenue/State's arguments: The State counsel did not dispute the petitioner's submissions and agreed that the writ petition could be disposed of in light of the judgment in M/s King Bricks versus State of Bihar.