The petitioner challenged blocking of the electronic credit ledger despite nil credit balance, along with issuance of ASMT-10 notice by State authorities. The factual background showed parallel proceedings by Central authorities on the same issue of alleged wrongful ITC availment.

The Court held that Rule 86A does not permit negative blocking of credit where no balance exists. It further held that simultaneous proceedings by State authorities were impermissible when Central authorities had already initiated action. The blocking orders and ASMT-10 notice were quashed.