Thales INDIA Private Limited vs. Commissioner Of CGST, Delhi South Commissionerate & Anr.
Held
The High Court, with the consent of both parties, took up the writ petition for hearing and final disposal. The Court noted the petitioner's assertion that the appellate authority had reserved its order on 23.09.2021, against an order dated 04.11.2020, and that no order had been passed thereafter. The Court disposed of the writ petition with a specific direction to the appellate authority. If the petitioner's assertions regarding the delay were found to be correct, the appellate authority was directed to pass a speaking order at the earliest, and in any event, not later than four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the High Court's order. The Court did not delve into the merits of the original appeal.
Facts
The petitioner, Thales India Private Limited, filed a writ petition before the Delhi High Court. The petitioner had filed an appeal against an order passed by the adjudicating authority on 04.11.2020. The appellate authority, respondent no. 2, had reserved its order in this appeal on 23.09.2021. However, as of the date of the writ petition, no order had been passed by the appellate authority. The petition was filed seeking a direction for the appellate authority to pass an order in the pending appeal.
Key Issues
1. Whether the High Court should direct the appellate authority to pass an order in the appeal filed by the petitioner, when the order has been reserved for an extended period? Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that the appellate authority had reserved its order on 23.09.2021, which was a considerable time prior to the filing of the writ petition. The petitioner contended that the delay in passing the order was causing prejudice and sought a direction for expeditious disposal. Revenue's contention: The revenue, represented by Ms. Anushree Narain, accepted notice on behalf of the respondents. The judgment does not record any specific arguments or contentions made by the revenue against the petitioner's prayer for a direction to pass an order.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
O R D E R %
2022
[Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)]
CM APPL. 27800/2022
Allowed, subject to just exceptions. W.P.(C) 9280/2022
Issue notice.
Ms Anushree Narain accepts notice on behalf of the respondents/revenue.
With the consent of the parties, the writ petition is taken up for hearing and final disposal, at this stage itself.
It is the petitioner’s case that although the appellate authority i.e., respondent no. 2 has reserved the order in the appeal preferred against the petitioner on 23.09.2021, no orders have been passed as yet.
It is averred that the appeal was preferred against the order of the adjudicating authority dated 04.11.2020. 6. In these circumstances, the
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 Delhi High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.