2025:UHC:3149-DB 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI G. NARENDAR AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK MAHRA 28TH APRIL, 2025 WRIT PETITION (M/B) No. 181 OF 2025 M/s Vikartan Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. …Petitioner Versus Commissioner, State Goods and Services Tax Commissionerate and others. …Respondents Counsel for the petitioner. : Mr. Syed Nadim, learned counsel. Counsel for the respondents. : Ms. Puja Banga, learned Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand. JUDGMENT : (per Sri G. Narendar, C.J.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner Mr. Syed Nadim, and the learned Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand Ms. Puja Banga. 2. It is not in dispute that no show-cause notice preceded the order blocking the ITC (in-put tax credit) account portal of the petitioner. It is the case of the Department that the petitioner had claimed Input Tax Credit from M/s Apex International, whose transactions were found to be dubious. Hence, an order to freeze the Input Tax Credit account of the petitioner came to be passed. Prima facie, in our opinion, the same does not 2025:UHC:3149-DB 2 mean that the transaction with the petitioner also can be presumed to be dubious. It was imperative on the respondents to issue a show-cause notice, and that is the scheme of the Act too. In the absence of the show-cause notice, the action of the respondents, prima facie, appears to be unjustified and hit by the provisions of the Act. 3. In that view, there shall be a stay of the order impugned. This order shall not come in the way of the respondents issuing a show-cause notice to the petitioner, and if such show-cause notice is issued, the same shall be replied by the petitioner within an outer limit of two weeks from the date of receipt of the show- cause notice. Thereafter, the respondents shall pass appropriate orders within three weeks from the date of receipt of the reply of the show-cause notice, and the respondents shall afford an opportunity of personal hearing and, thereafter, pass orders. 4. At this stage, learned State Counsel would submit that, in view of the nature of the order passed, the Writ Petition may be disposed of on the above-said terms itself. 2025:UHC:3149-DB 3 5. The submission of the learned State Counsel is placed on record. 6. The Writ Petition stands disposed of in the above terms. 7. The operation of the impugned proceedings shall remain stayed till the hearing and disposal, as stipulated above. It is made clear that this order is in respect of the impugned order, whereby ITC account of the petitioner has been freezed. All contentions and other issues are left open to be dealt with, strictly in accordance with law. As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed. _______________ G. NARENDAR, C.J. _____________ ALOK MAHRA, J. Dt: 28th April, 2025 Rahul Digitally signed by RAHUL PRAJAPATI DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=aa4fa3bee6691397758b14516ed3e66e61bf4c848741983e d8c39e4145cf1dab, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=303B55CC3063D34AC45BF8A192FCAD15C390A1AA D7B39857D2540AE4C28A4898, cn=RAHUL PRAJAPATI Date: 2025.04.29 10:46:09 +05'30'