Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Writ petitioner has been preferred for the following reliefs:

“(a) For issuance of an appropriate writ, order or directions, directing upon the Respondent No.3 to show cause as to how and under what authority of law, the amount of Input Tax Credit lying in the Electronic Credit Ledger of the petitioner has been blocked, without even there being any determination of any amount due as against this petitioner.

(b) For issuance of an appropriate writ, order or directions, holding and declaring that the blocking of Input Tax Credit lying with the Electronic Credit Ledger of Assessee, without there being any determination of tax and without even finalization of any proceeding is bad in law, when claim of Input Tax Credit has been on the basis of the purchases carried out under the valid invoices, transport documents including E-way Bills and payments have been made after receipt of the articles/goods via banking channel.

(c) For issuance of an appropriate writ, order of direction, directing upon the respondents to show cause as to when a proceeding in terms of the Notice dated 11.12.2021 is pending, in terms of Form GST ASMT 10 issued under Section 61 of the Act read with Rule 99 (1) of the Rules, without there being any finalization thereof, how the registration of the assessee could not have been suspended.

(d) Consequent thereupon, the Respondent No.3 be directed to:-

I) Withdraw the blocking of the Input Tax Credit available to the petitioner in terms of Electronic Credit Ledger.

II) Withdraw the suspension of registration, which has been carried out, without any valid much less plausible reason and without providing any opportunity of hearing, which is otherwise also, in violation of Rule 21 A of the Rules 2017.

(e) For issuance of any other appropriate writ(s)/order(s)/directions(s) as Your Lordships may deem just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case for imparting substantial justice to the petitioner.”

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits on instructions that the suspension of registration of the petitioner has been revoked during pendency of the writ petition. The only surviving grievance relates to blocking of the Input Tax Credit lying in the Electronic Credit Ledger of the petitioner. Petitioner has responded to the notice in Form GST ASMT 10 issued under Section 61 of the JGST Act, 2017 read with Rule 99(1) of the JGST Rules. Petitioner has also made representation before the respondent No.3 for revocation of the blocking of the Input Tax Credit lying in the Electronic Credit Ledger.

Petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the writ petition to pursue his representation before the authority concerned. He submits that the withdrawal of the writ petition may not be construed as waiving the grounds available to it in law and facts before the respondent No.3.

It goes without saying.

Learned counsel for the respondent Mr. Mittal submits that it is up to the petitioner to pursue his representation before the Respondent no. 3 which shall be considered in accordance with law.

In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn leaving it open to the petitioner to pursue his representation before the respondent authorities relating to his grievance of blocking of Input Tax Credit lying in the Electronic Credit Ledger.