Writ challenge became infructuous after notice withdrawal; court also directed a certificate to substitute lost export documents.

Withdrawal of the impugned notice rendered the writ challenge infructuous because no live controversy remained for adjudication. Where duplicate export documents were unavailable after theft, the court recognised that a certificate recording the export transaction particulars could be issued in lieu of duplicate shipping bills. The petitioner was directed to resubmit the available particulars for issuance of the certificate, and the appellate authority under the Bihar Value Added Tax Act, 2005 was to consider that certificate together with other evidence while deciding the appeal.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the writ petition challenging the bank notice survived after the notice was withdrawn and became infructuous; (ii) Whether, in place of duplicate export documents lost in theft, the petitioner was entitled to a direction for issuance of a certificate evidencing the export transaction details for use before the appellate authority under the Bihar Value Added Tax Act, 2005.

Issue (i): Whether the writ petition challenging the bank notice survived after the notice was withdrawn and became infructuous.

Analysis: The notice issued under Section 47 of the Bihar Value Added Tax Act, 2005 had already been withdrawn by the department. Once the impugned notice no longer subsisted, no live controversy remained for adjudication in that writ proceeding.

Conclusion: The challenge to the withdrawn notice was infructuous and the writ petition on that aspect did not survive.

Issue (ii): Whether, in place of duplicate export documents lost in theft, the petitioner was entitled to a direction for issuance of a certificate evidencing the export transaction details for use before the appellate authority under the Bihar Value Added Tax Act, 2005.

Analysis: The customs authority had indicated that duplicate EDI shipping bills could not be issued where documents were lost, but a certificate could be granted stating that the export order had been recorded in the system. The petitioner had already furnished particulars such as bill number, bill date, party name, invoice amount and dispatch date. In these circumstances, the Court directed the petitioner to make a fresh application with the particulars already available, and required the Commissioner of Customs to issue the certificate contemplated by the public notice within a fixed time. The appellate authority was directed to consider that certificate along with other evidence while deciding the VAT appeal.

Conclusion: The petitioner was granted relief by way of a direction for issuance of the certificate in lieu of duplicate export documents.

Final Conclusion: One writ petition failed as infructuous, while the other was disposed of with a mandatory direction to facilitate production of secondary evidence before the VAT appellate authority.

---