M/S. Godrej Consumer Products LTD. vs. Union Of INDIA And 2 Ors.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s. Godrej Consumer Products Ltd., filed a writ petition before the Gauhati High Court. The respondents were the Union of India, the Commissioner of Central Goods and Service Tax, Guwahati, and the Assistant Commissioner, Central Goods and Service Tax, Guwahati Division. The petitioner's counsel submitted that the matter had become infructuous. This was due to an order dated 20.08.2025 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Eastern Zonal Bench, Kolkata, in Excise Appeal No. 75230/2024 and other connected appeals. The specific tax period(s) and the amount in dispute were not recorded in the judgment. The order under challenge was not explicitly stated, but it pertained to GST matters handled by the GST authorities.

Held

The Court held that the writ petition had become infructuous. This decision was based solely on the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner's counsel stated that the matter had become infructuous in view of an order dated 20.08.2025 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Eastern Zonal Bench, Kolkata, in Excise Appeal No. 75230/2024 and other connected appeals. The Court accepted this submission without further independent analysis or discussion of the CESTAT order's contents or its impact on the GST matter. The ratio decidendi is that if a party to a writ petition submits that the matter has become infructuous due to a subsequent order by a higher appellate authority, the High Court may close the proceedings on that basis. The operative direction was to close the writ petition as infructuous. No issues were expressly left undecided.

Key Issues

1. Whether the writ petition is rendered infructuous in light of the order passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT)? Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner argued that the writ petition had become infructuous. This contention was based on an order dated 20.08.2025 passed by the CESTAT, Kolkata, in Excise Appeal No. 75230/2024 and other connected appeals. The petitioner relied on this CESTAT order as the basis for their claim that the present proceedings were no longer necessary. Revenue's Argument: The judgment records no specific argument from the respondent GST authorities regarding the infructuous nature of the petition. Their appearance was noted, and a counsel was heard, but their stance on the specific issue of the petition becoming infructuous was not detailed.