1 2026:CGHC:609 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPT No. 196 of 2021 1 - M/s Shri Krishna Iron And Steel Associates, Raipur Through Its Proprietor Jitendra Chhabadia, S/o Ramchandra Chhabadia, Aged About 50 Years, R/o Ashoka Ratan, Shankar Nagar, Raipur (Chhattisgarh). ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Commercial Tax, Mahanadi Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, Post Office And Police Station Naya Raipur, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh). 2 - Additional Commissioner Commercial Tax, Commercial Tax Bhawan, Civil Lines, Raipur (Chhattisgarh). 3 - Assistant Commissioner Commercial Tax Division - II, Raipur (Chhattisgarh) ... Respondents (Cause title, as taken from CIS) For Petitioner For State : : Mr. Dinesh Yadav, Advocate appears on behalf of Mr. Anuroop Panda, Advocate Mr. DR Minj, Dy. Advocate General. (Hon'ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Order on Board 06/01/2026 1. Heard. 2. This petition has been preferred by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following reliefs:- “i. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to set aside the impugned orders: (a) dated 2/3/2021 (Annexure-P/1) passed in RUKHSAR BANO Digitally signed by RUKHSAR BANO Date: 2026.01.08 10:35:27 +0530 2 Appeal Case No.A/51/37/2019/CST (Period 2010-11) by the Chairman, Chhattisgarh Commercial Tax Tribunal, Raipur; (b) dated 8/12/2017 (Annexure-P/2) passed in Appeal Case No.37/RYP-II/2016/Central (Period 2010-11) by the Respondent No.2; and (c) dated 30/12/2015 (Annexure-P/3) passed in Case No. 80/2011 (Central Tax) (Period 2010-11) by respondent No.3. ii. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to permit the petitioner to submit the duplicate 'C' Form and E-1 Form and to reassess the tax imposed upon the petitioner. iii. Cost of the petition may also be granted to the petitioner. iv. Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper, may also kindly be granted to the petitioner, in the interest of justice. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the tax amount challenged by petitioner has been deposited by it, therefore, this petition has become infructuous. 4. In view of above contention, this writ petition is dismissed as having become infructuous. 5. No order as to cost(s). Sd/- (Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) JUDGE Rukhsar