Section 75 of the CGST Act, 2017 — Notice – The Petitioner was visited with a notice dated 24.03.2022 inter alia under Rule 142(1A); that the petitioner sent a reply dated 25.04.2022; an order dated 30.09.2022 which inter alia cripples the writ petitioner's bank account with the second respondent bank. The counsel for petitioner submitted proceedings should have culminated under Section 73 or Section 74. The Revenue counsel submitted that the impugned order has been made under Section 79(1)(c) and the impugned notice makes it clear that the writ petitioner has been treated as a defaulter under sub-section (12) of Section 75. The court observed that notice appears to be a template and it talks about tax while it is actually interest. Further, sub-section (12) of Section 75 opens with a non obstante expression and is notwithstanding Section 73 and Section 74. It deems appropriate to provide one window to the writ petitioner.

Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court directed that the first respondent shall consider the reply of the petitioner dated 25.04.2022 and take a call on the same as expeditiously, within three weeks.