M/S Shanti Swaroop Nikhil Kumar vs. Additional Commissioner CGST North

Original PDF →
W.P.(C)/5338/2025HC DelhiGSTCNR DLHC01023307202525 April 2025Bench: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTA2 pages
For Petitioner: Mr Abhimanyu Jhamba, Ms. Thonpinao Thangal and Ms. Ayushi Srivastava, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Mr. Vijay Joshi, Sr. Standing Counsel (CBIC) with Mr. Hemant Goyal, Advocate
AI SummaryDismissed

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Shanti Swaroop Nikhil Kumar, filed a writ petition before the Delhi High Court challenging an order dated January 21, 2025, passed by the Additional Commissioner CGST, North, under Section 74 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner, through their counsel, sought permission to withdraw the present petition. The court was informed that the petitioner intended to approach the Appellate Authority. The court granted liberty to file an appeal within thirty days, subject to making the pre-deposit amount. If this condition was met, the appeal would not be dismissed on grounds of limitation and would be adjudicated on its merits. The petition was subsequently dismissed as withdrawn.

Held

The Court held that the petitioner should be permitted to withdraw the writ petition. The reasoning was based on the petitioner's explicit request to approach the Appellate Authority. The Court's decision was to grant liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal before the Appellate Authority within thirty days from the date of the order. This liberty was conditional upon the petitioner making the necessary pre-deposit amount. The Court further directed that if the appeal was filed within the stipulated period and the pre-deposit was made, the appeal would not be dismissed on the grounds of limitation and would be adjudicated on its merits. The ratio decidendi is that a writ petition can be withdrawn to pursue a statutory remedy, provided the conditions for availing that remedy are met within a specified timeframe, and the court grants such liberty.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner should be permitted to withdraw the writ petition to pursue the statutory remedy before the Appellate Authority? The petitioner argued that they wished to avail the appellate remedy and sought permission to withdraw the writ petition. They contended that the court should grant them this liberty. The revenue or State did not record any specific arguments against the withdrawal in the judgment. The court had to decide whether to allow the withdrawal and grant liberty to approach the Appellate Authority, considering the pendency of the writ petition and the availability of a statutory appeal mechanism.

Sections Cited

Section 74

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
$~43 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 5338/2025 M/S SHANTI SWAROOP NIKHIL KUMAR .....Petitioner Through: Mr Abhimanyu Jhamba, Ms. Thonpinao Thangal and Ms. Ayushi Srivastava, Advocates. versus ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER CGST NORTH .....Respondent Through: Mr. Vijay Joshi, Sr. Standing Counsel (CBIC) with Mr. Hemant Goyal, Advocate. CORAM: JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH JUSTICE RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTA

O R D E R % 25.04.2025

1.

This hearing has been done through hybrid mode. CM APPL.24325/2025 (for exemption)

2.

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Application is disposed of. W.P.(C) 5338/2025 & CM APPL. 24324/2025 (for interim relief)

3.

The present petition has been filed by the Petitioner – M/s Shanti Swaroop Nikhil Kumar under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, assailing the impugned order dated 21st January, 2025 under Section 74 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter, ‘CGST Act’) issued by the Additional Commissioner CGST, North.

4.

Ld. Counsel for the Petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the present petition with liberty to approach the Appellate Authority.

5.

Let the appeal be filed within thirty days along with the pre-deposit This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 01/07/2025 at 19:33:22

amount. If the same is done within thirty days, the matter shall not be dismissed on the ground of limitation and shall be adjudicated on merits.

6.

The present petition is dismissed as withdrawn. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J. RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTA, J. APRIL 25, 2025/nd/ck This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 01/07/2025 at 19:33:22

Reproduced from the public record of the Delhi High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.