Mrinal Kanti Chandra vs. The Union Of INDIA And Ors.

Held

The Court allowed the withdrawal of the writ petition. The reasoning was based on the petitioner's explicit request to withdraw and pursue the statutory remedy before the appellate tribunal, coupled with the absence of any objection from the revenue authorities. The Court granted liberty to the petitioner to approach the tribunal within a period of 4 weeks from the date of the order, in accordance with the law. No specific issue regarding the merits of the case or the GST provisions was decided, as the petition was withdrawn at the procedural stage.

Facts

The petitioner, Mrinal Kanti Chandra, filed a writ petition before the High Court. The petitioner's advocate informed the Court that they had instructions to withdraw the writ petition. The reason for withdrawal was to allow the petitioner to pursue the remedy available before the appellate tribunal under the WBGST/CGST Act, 2017. The CGST authorities, represented by Ms. Manasi Mukherjee, did not raise any objection to the withdrawal. The Court was presented with an undated letter in support of the withdrawal request.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner should be permitted to withdraw the writ petition to avail the remedy before the appellate tribunal under the WBGST/CGST Act, 2017. Petitioner's contention: The petitioner, through their counsel, sought to withdraw the writ petition to pursue the statutory remedy available before the appellate tribunal. This implies an argument that the writ jurisdiction should not be exercised when an alternative efficacious remedy exists. Revenue's contention: The CGST authorities, represented by Ms. Manasi Mukherjee, did not raise any objection to the withdrawal of the writ petition.