CWP- 9446-2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT M/s Creative Impex State of Punjab and another CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI Present : Mr. for the petitioner. Mr. Saurabh Kapoor, Additional A.G., Punjab DEEPAK SIBAL The petitioner was issued a show cause notice under Section 74 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 read with Rule 142(1) of the CGST Act 2019-20 to the effect that the petitioner had evaded payment of GST on account of suspicious transactions. The petitioner filed a written response thereto but in petitioner’s written response has been ignored as it has been mentioned in the impugned adjudication order that the petitioner response to the show cause notice dated 02.09.2021. 2. Learned State counsel fairly submits that though the had filed a written response to the show cause notice dated 02.09.2021 but the same was inadvertently overlooked by the proper officer at the time of passing of the impugned adjudication order dated 30.12.2025. 3. In light of the above, the imp 30.12.2025 is found to have 2026 (O&M) Sr. No.138 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP- 9446 Date of Decision : M/s Creative Impex Versus State of Punjab and another HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI Mr. Sholab Arora, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Saurabh Kapoor, Additional A.G., Punjab *** DEEPAK SIBAL, J. (Oral) The petitioner was issued a show cause notice under Section 74 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 read with Rule 142(1) Act, 2017 and PGST Act, 2017 pertaining to the tax period 20 to the effect that the petitioner had evaded payment of GST on account of suspicious transactions. The petitioner filed a written response in the impugned adjudication order dated 30.12.2025 written response has been ignored as it has been mentioned in the impugned adjudication order that the petitioner response to the show cause notice dated 02.09.2021. Learned State counsel fairly submits that though the had filed a written response to the show cause notice dated 02.09.2021 but the same was inadvertently overlooked by the proper officer at the time of the impugned adjudication order dated 30.12.2025. In light of the above, the impugned adjudication order dated is found to have been passed without application of mind and is IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 9446-2026 (O&M) Date of Decision : 21.04.2026 …Petitioner …Respondents DEEPAK SIBAL HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI Mr. Saurabh Kapoor, Additional A.G., Punjab. The petitioner was issued a show cause notice under Section 74 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 read with Rule 142(1) , 2017 pertaining to the tax period 20 to the effect that the petitioner had evaded payment of GST on account of suspicious transactions. The petitioner filed a written response the impugned adjudication order dated 30.12.2025 the written response has been ignored as it has been mentioned in the impugned adjudication order that the petitioner did not file any written response to the show cause notice dated 02.09.2021. Learned State counsel fairly submits that though the petitioner had filed a written response to the show cause notice dated 02.09.2021 but the same was inadvertently overlooked by the proper officer at the time of the impugned adjudication order dated 30.12.2025. ugned adjudication order dated been passed without application of mind and is VANDANA 2026.04.24 11:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP- 9446-2026 therefore, set aside. However, liberty is granted to the respondents to proceed afresh against the petitioner, in accordance with law. April 21, 2026 vandana Whether speaking/reasoned : Whether reportable 2026 (O&M) set aside. However, liberty is granted to the respondents to proceed afresh against the petitioner, in accordance with law. (DEEPAK SIBAL JUDGE (LAPITA BANERJI) JUDGE , 2026 ther speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No set aside. However, liberty is granted to the respondents to proceed afresh against the petitioner, in accordance with law. DEEPAK SIBAL) JUDGE (LAPITA BANERJI) JUDGE VANDANA 2026.04.24 11:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document