Page No.# 1/6 GAHC010083712026 2026:GAU-AS:6037 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/2300/2026 AIDA BITUMEX AND ANR HOLDING GSTIN 18CCVPS4070H1ZX A PROPRIETORSHIP CONCERN HAVING ITS OFFICE AND GODOWN AT VILL. MIKIRPARA, SARDOI, PAMOHI - 781035, ASSAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR MRS. SHAHINA SULTANA. 2: MRS SHAHINA SULTANA WIFE OF SHAHBAZ HAIDER AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS PERMANENT RESIDENT OF PATNA BIHAR PRESENTLY RESIDED AT VILL. MIKIRPARA SARDOI PAMOHI781035 ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS. THROUGH THE COMMISSIONER SECRETARY, FINANCE (TAXATION) DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF ASSAM, JANATA BHAWAN, DISPUR, GUWAHATI -781006, ASSAM 2:THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAXES OFFICE AT KAR BHAWAN DISPUR GUWAHATI - 781006 ASSAM 3:THE COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX (SGST) ASSAM OFFICE AT KAR BHAWAN DISPUR GUWAHATI - 781006 Page No.# 2/6 ASSAM 4:THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX (SGST) UNIT-B GUWAHATI OFFICE AT KAR BHAWAN DISPUR GUWAHATI -781006 ASSAM 5:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX (SGST) UNIT-B GUWAHATI OFFICE AT KAR BHAWAN DISPUR GUWAHATI - 781006 ASSAM 6:THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX (SGST) UNIT - B-2 OFFICE AT KAR BHAWAN DISPUR GUWAHATI - 781006 ASSAM 7:SUPERINTENDENT OF STATE TAX UNIT-B GUWAHATI (MINAKHI BORGOHAIN) OFFICE AT KAR BHAWAN DISPUR GUWAHATI -781006 ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR G RENGMA, A K JHA Advocate for the Respondent : SC, FINANCE AND TAXATION, Page No.# 3/6 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY ORDER 04.05.2026 Heard Mr. A.K. Jha, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. B. Choudhury, learned Standing Counsel, Finance & Taxation Department for all the respondents. 2. The petitioners has instituted the instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following reliefs :- a. Direct the respondents to immediately return all goods, documents, inventories, and materials seized, which are neither relied upon in adjudication nor forming part of any valid or subsisting investigation, and whose continued retention is wholly without authority of law. b. Direct the respondents to forthwith revoke the suspension of the petitioner’s GST registration, which has been continued without adherence to the statutory mandate and in violation of principles of natural justice. c. Direct the respondents to lift and revoke the provisional attachment of the petitioner’s operation bank account, imposed under Section 83 of the CGST/AGST Act, being illegal, unsustainable, and devoid of jurisdiction, particularly post-adjudication. d. Direct the respondents to place on record the entire file, including satisfaction note, reasons to believe, and records forming basis of search, seizure and attachment. e. Restrain the respondents from re-agitating or including demands already Page No.# 4/6 adjudicated and presently pending before the appellate forum in any parallel or ongoing proceedings, being impermissible in law and amounting to multiplicity and abuse of process. f. Quash and set aside the impugned search authorization issued in Form GST INS-01 dated 21.05.2025, as well as the summons dated 28.05.2025, being vitiated by absence of jurisdictional foundation, lack of proper ‘reason to believe’, and constituting a disproportionate and duplicate exercise of power and procedural overreach being without jurisdiction, disproportionate and amounting to abuse of statutory process. g. Direct the respondents to pay compensation to the petitioner for the unlawful, arbitrary, and extra-statutory actions resulting in illegal retention of goods and documents, illegal freezing of bank account without due process, suspension of GST registration without lawful justification and paralyzing the lawful business operation from one year; quantified at such amount as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit, considering loss of goodwill, business disruption, and unlawful deprivation of property. h. Award exemplary costs against the respondents, in view of abuse of statutory power, repeated non-compliance with statutory mandates, failure to respond to lawful representations, compelling the petitioner to approach this Hon’ble Court for enforcement of basic rights. i. Pass such further or other orders, including directions for institutional accountability and compliance with statutory safeguards, as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper. 3. The petitioners had preferred a writ petition, W.P.[C] no. 3576/2025 earlier and during the pendency of the writ petition, an Order under Section 74 of the AGST Act, 2017 was Page No.# 5/6 passed on 31.12.2025 and also an Order of even date under Section 74A of the AGST Act, was passed. In other words, it was during the pendency of the writ petition, W.P.[C] no. 3576/2025, the Orders dated 31.12.2025 were passed. 4. Taking note of the Orders dated 31.12.2025, the writ petition, W.P.[C] no. 3576/2025 was dismissed with the following observations :- 8. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the pleadings on record, this court is to the view that the writ petition was filed putting a challenge to the process undertaken by the respondent for suspension of the GST registration; the attachment of the bank account and raising any demands in terms of the proceedings which were undertaken and also to return the documents and inventories materials seized unlawfully according to the petitioner and further to quash the proceedings under INS-01 issued on 21.05.2025. During the pendency of this petition, since the final orders have already been passed under Sections 74 and 74A of the CGST Act and there are adequate appellate provisions prescribed under the statute, the question of the legality of the procedure undertaken by the respondent authorities which is assailed in the present writ petition, according to this Court will not serve any useful purpose as in the meantime the respondent authorities have concluded the proceedings and have passed final orders dated 31.12.2025 and which order as on date the petitioner has not assailed till date. As admitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner, there is no specific challenge to the impugned order, either in the present writ petition or in any other proceedings before this Court. 9. Under such circumstances, this court does not find any merit in the present writ petition to entertain the grievances raised by the petitioner in view of the final orders dated 31.12.2025 passed by the respondent authorities. The writ petition being devoid to any merit and the same stands dismissal. No order as to cost. Page No.# 6/6 10. The dismissal of the writ petition however will not curtail the right of the petitioners to assail the order passed by the respondent authorities pursuant to the summons issued vide order dated 31.12.2025. 5. On a query, the learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that no appeal as on date against the orders as required under the provisions of the AGST Act can be said to be pending before the appellate authority. The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that though an appeal has been preferred against the Orders dated 31.12.2025, the appeal has been filed without the requisite pre-deposit as prescribed by the AGST Act, 2017 6. Having regard to the reliefs sought for in the writ petition and the purport of the Order dated 27.01.2026 passed in W.P.[C] no. 3576/2025, this Court is of the considered view that the writ petition was dismissed on 27.01.2026, reserving the liberty to the petitioners to assail the Orders dated 31.12.2025 by way of an appeal wherein all the reliefs sought for in this writ petition would be available to the petitioners to be agitated before the appellate forum. In such view of the matter, this Court does not find any reason to entertain the instant writ petition. Resultantly, the writ petition is dismissed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant