Innanje Sahakari Vyavasaya Sangha LTD vs. Union Of INDIA
Held
The Court considered the memo filed by the petitioner seeking withdrawal of the writ petition. The memo stated that the petitioner had filed an application under the "Sabka Vishwas – Legacy Dispute Resolution Scheme, 2019" for settlement of the service tax dispute, which was the subject of the writ petition. The application had been heard, and orders were reserved. The petitioner sought permission to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to revive it in case their settlement application was rejected. The Court found the memo acceptable and granted the permission sought. Therefore, the writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty reserved to the petitioner as requested.
Facts
The petitioner, Innanje Sahakari Vyavsaya Sangha Ltd., filed a writ petition before the Karnataka High Court challenging two notices dated July 10, 2019, and August 1, 2019, issued by the Superintendent of Central Excise & Central Tax (GST), Udupi. These notices pertained to a dispute concerning service tax. During the pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner filed an application before the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise and Central Tax, Udupi, under the "Sabka Vishwas – Legacy Dispute Resolution Scheme, 2019" for the settlement of the service tax dispute. The application was heard, and orders were reserved.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner should be permitted to withdraw the writ petition in light of their application filed under the "Sabka Vishwas – Legacy Dispute Resolution Scheme, 2019" for settlement of the service tax dispute, with liberty to revive the petition if the settlement application is rejected. Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that they have availed the "Sabka Vishwas – Legacy Dispute Resolution Scheme, 2019" to settle the dispute that forms the subject matter of the writ petition. They sought permission to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to revive it if their settlement application is rejected by the authorities. The petitioner relied on the pendency of their application before the Assistant Commissioner for settlement. Respondent's contention: The judgment does not record any specific contention from the respondents regarding the withdrawal of the petition. The respondents were represented by a Central Government Counsel.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
Office objections are overruled.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Karnataka High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.