Axis Energy Ventures INDIA PVT.LTD vs. The Appellate Joint Commissioner

Held

The Court held that the petitioner is permitted to withdraw the Writ Petition with liberty. The reasoning is based on the petitioner's request to pursue alternative remedies available under Section 128-A of the CGST Act, 2017, for waiver of interest or penalty, and to make a representation regarding the deposit amount. The Court found no impediment to granting this request. The ratio decidendi is that a petitioner can be allowed to withdraw a writ petition to pursue statutory remedies, especially when such remedies are available and the petitioner expresses a clear intention to avail them. The operative direction is that the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty granted to the petitioner. No order as to costs was made. No issues were expressly left undecided.

Facts

The petitioner, Axis Energy Ventures India Pvt. Ltd., filed a Writ Petition (WP No. 8425/2021) before the High Court of Andhra Pradesh. Subsequently, the petitioner filed I.A. No. 1 of 2025 seeking permission to withdraw the Writ Petition. The withdrawal was sought with the liberty to file an application for waiver of interest or penalty under Section 128-A of the CGST Act, 2017, and to make a representation before the respondents concerning a deposit amount paid in compliance with an interim order dated April 19, 2021. The respondents are the Appellate Joint Commissioner and others.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner should be permitted to withdraw the Writ Petition with liberty to pursue alternative remedies under the CGST Act, 2017? Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner argued that they should be allowed to withdraw the Writ Petition to pursue an application for waiver of interest or penalty under Section 128-A of the CGST Act, 2017, and to make a representation regarding the deposit amount paid. This implies a desire to resolve the matter through statutory mechanisms rather than continuing with the writ proceedings. Respondent's Argument: The judgment does not record any specific arguments from the respondents regarding the withdrawal application. The court's order suggests that the respondents did not oppose the withdrawal or that their stance was not considered a material factor in the court's decision to grant the withdrawal.