Mahapuja Ltd. Vs Office of The Commissioner of CGST (Bombay High Court)
The Bombay High Court considered a petition challenging the Order-In-Original dated 17 March 2026 passed by the Additional Commissioner of CGST, Central Excise, Mumbai, and issued in Form GST DRC-07 under Rules 100(1), 100(2), 100(3) and 142(5) of the CGST Rules, 2017. The respondents raised a preliminary objection that the order was appealable under Section 107 of the CGST Act and that the petitioner had approached the Writ Court without exhausting the statutory appellate remedy. The petitioner, a jewellery business, alleged violation of natural justice following search and seizure operations commenced on 10 February 2021 under Section 67 of the CGST Act, including seizure of documents, books of accounts, business records and electronic devices. The petitioner also challenged a fresh Show Cause Notice dated 26 June 2025 proposing disallowance of Input Tax Credit under Section 16 and tax, including IGST, CGST and SGST, along with other dues and penalty of Rs. 6.50 Crores. It contended that relied-upon seized documents had not been supplied before adjudication.
The respondents submitted that a personal hearing notice dated 16 January 2026 had been issued, followed by the petitioner’s detailed reply dated 3 February 2026, and that the Impugned Order addressed the grievance regarding documents. The Court found that paragraph 24 of the Impugned Order recorded that the Show Cause Notice and relied-upon documents had been forwarded to the petitioner’s registered GST email address and another available email address on 28 June 2025, and again to another email address on 4 February 2026 at the petitioner’s request. The Court therefore found that the relied-upon documents had been provided. It also noted that the petitioner had not specified which documents were allegedly unavailable or what prejudice resulted.
