M/S.Shc-Plr(Jv) vs. Shri. M. Venugopal Reddy
Held
The Court noted that the present Contempt Case was filed for willful and deliberate violation of the order dated 24.11.2020 in W.P.No.17370 of 2020. The original order had set aside a previous order and remanded the matter to the first respondent for reconsideration within a specified period, noting a default in compliance with Rule 90(1) and Circular No.79 regarding the issuance of acknowledgment in FORM GST RFD-02. When the contempt case was taken up, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner had received the amount. Recording this statement, the Court closed the Contempt Case. The reasoning for closing the case was based on the petitioner's submission that the grievance leading to the contempt petition had been resolved, implying compliance or resolution of the underlying issue.
Facts
This matter concerns Contempt Case No. 1505 of 2021, filed under Sections 10 to 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. The petitioner alleged willful and deliberate violation of an order dated 24.11.2020, passed in W.P.No.17370 of 2020. The original writ petition had been allowed, setting aside an order and remanding the matter back to the first respondent for reconsideration within two to three weeks from 25.11.2020. The original order noted a default in compliance with Rule 90(1) read with para 2(d) of Circular No.79, specifically the non-issuance of acknowledgment in FORM GST RFD-02 within 15 days. The contempt case was filed due to the alleged non-compliance with this order.
Key Issues
1. Whether the respondents have willfully and deliberately violated the order dated 24.11.2020 passed in W.P.No.17370 of 2020, thereby constituting contempt of court? The petitioner argued that the respondents failed to comply with the directions of the Court within the stipulated period, which included remanding the matter for reconsideration and issuing the acknowledgment in FORM GST RFD-02 within 15 days. The petitioner contended that this non-compliance amounted to contempt. The revenue or State did not record any specific arguments in the judgment regarding the alleged violation. The core of the contempt petition revolved around the enforcement of the prior writ court's order.
Sections Cited
Rule 90(1)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.PRAVEEN KUMAR
AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE M. GANGA RAO
CONTEMPT CASE No.1505 of 2021
ORDER:-
The present Contempt Case is filed under Sections 10 to 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 for willful and deliberate violation of the Order, dated 24.11.2020, in W.P.No.17370 of 2020, which reads as under: “Having regard to the fact that there is a default in compliance of Rule 90(1) read with para 2(d) of Circular No.79, and since the acknowledgment in FORM GST RFD-02 was not issued within 15 days, the order under challenge is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the 1st respondent to deal with the request of the petitioner in all respects, in accordance with law, within a period of two to three weeks from 25.11.2020. Accordingly, the Writ petition is allowed. No order as to costs”.
Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, Sri P. Girish Kumar, learned counsel for petitioner submits that the petitioner has received the amount.
Recording the said statement, the Contempt Case is closed. No order as to costs.
Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in this Contempt Case shall stand closed.
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 Andhra Pradesh High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.