Indian Supply vs. Union Of INDIA

Facts

The petitioner, Indian Supply, filed a writ-application before the High Court of Gujarat challenging the blocking of its Electronic Credit Ledger. This action was taken by the revenue authorities in exercise of powers under Rule 86A of the CGST Rules, 2017. The specific tax period and the amount in dispute are not recorded in the judgment. The procedural history leading to the blocking of the ledger is also not detailed. The matter came before the High Court for hearing.

Held

The Court noted that the writ-applicant had filed the application because its Electronic Credit Ledger was blocked under Rule 86A of the CGST Rules, 2017. During the hearing, the learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the ledger has been unblocked. This statement was confirmed by the learned counsel for the writ-applicant. Consequently, as the grievance has been redressed and the ledger unblocked, the Court found no further adjudication to be required. The writ-application was disposed of accordingly, and the notice issued was discharged. The ratio decidendi is that if the revenue takes corrective action to remedy the petitioner's grievance before adjudication, the writ petition may be disposed of as infructuous.

Key Issues

1. Whether the blocking of the petitioner's Electronic Credit Ledger under Rule 86A of the CGST Rules, 2017, was justified. The petitioner argued that its Electronic Credit Ledger was blocked, necessitating the filing of this writ-application. The revenue, represented by the Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise, Surat Commissionerate, and other respondents, stated that the ledger has since been unblocked. The petitioner's counsel confirmed this statement. No specific legal arguments or reliance on authorities, circulars, or precedents were recorded for either side beyond the factual submission regarding the unblocking of the ledger.