M/S Ashapura Corporation vs. Additional Director

Held

On the first issue concerning WP No. 22647/2022 and 26 connected matters, the Court accepted the submission that the dispute related to GST and that these petitions had already been disposed of by a separate order on December 17, 2025. Consequently, no further orders were deemed necessary. Regarding WP No. 35830/2025, the Court noted that it had been disposed of by a common order. However, the Revenue had filed an appeal (WA No. 1089/2026) which was considered by the Division Bench. The Division Bench, by its order dated April 24, 2026, restored the matter for reconsideration with the observation that the writ appeal would be adjudicated on merits. In light of this, the Court de-tagged WP No. 35830/2025 and directed the office to relist it for preliminary hearing on August 11, 2026. The ratio for the first set of petitions is that once a matter is disposed of by a specific order, no further orders are required if the dispute has been resolved. For the second petition, the ratio is that if an appeal leads to a remand for reconsideration on merits, the original writ petition should be relisted.

Facts

The petitioners, including M/s. EDGE SOLUTIONS, filed writ petitions challenging orders related to GST. The Court noted that these matters were inadvertently listed with other cases. For WP No. 22647/2022 and 26 connected matters, the Court accepted submissions that the dispute related to GST and these petitions were disposed of by a separate order on December 17, 2025, rendering further orders unnecessary. In WP No. 35830/2025, the petitioner's counsel stated the writ petition was disposed of by a common order. However, the Revenue appealed this order in WA No. 1089/2026, and the Division Bench restored the matter for reconsideration, directing adjudication on merits. The Revenue's standing counsel was heard, and the Division Bench's order dated April 24, 2026, was perused.

Key Issues

1. Whether the writ petitions related to GST, which were disposed of by a separate order on December 17, 2025, require any further orders from this Court? Petitioner's contention: The petitioners' counsel submitted that the matters were inadvertently listed and that the dispute related to GST, having been disposed of by a separate order on December 17, 2025. Revenue's contention: Not recorded. 2. Whether WP No. 35830/2025, which was disposed of by a common order, should be relisted for preliminary hearing, considering the Revenue's appeal and the Division Bench's order directing reconsideration on merits? Petitioner's contention: The writ petition was disposed of in light of the Court's common order. Revenue's contention: The Revenue preferred an appeal (WA No. 1089/2026) which was allowed by the Division Bench, restoring the matter for reconsideration on merits.