Calcutta Club LTD vs. Principal Comm Of CGST And Cx ,Kol And Ors
Held
The Court allowed the petitioner's request to withdraw the writ petition. The reasoning provided is that the petitioner, through their counsel, clearly communicated their decision not to pursue the matter further and formally sought its dismissal as withdrawn. As the petitioner is the party initiating the legal action, they generally have the right to withdraw their case. The Court accepted this submission and proceeded to dismiss the writ petition accordingly. No specific issues regarding GST law or the merits of the case were decided, as the petition was withdrawn before any substantive adjudication. The operative direction was to dismiss the writ petition and the connected application as withdrawn.
Facts
The petitioner, Calcutta Club Limited, filed a writ petition (WPA 14485 of 2022) along with an application (CAN 1 of 2024) before the Calcutta High Court. The respondents were the Principal Commissioner of CGST and CX, Kolkata South CGST & CX Commissionerate, and others. The matter was listed for hearing. The petitioner's counsel informed the Court that the petitioner was no longer willing to pursue the writ petition and sought its withdrawal. A printout of an e-mail dated September 18, 2025, from the petitioner to its Advocate-on-Record, indicating this decision, was submitted to the Court and taken on record. The respondents were represented.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to withdraw the writ petition as a matter of right, given their stated unwillingness to pursue it further. Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner, through their counsel, explicitly stated their unwillingness to continue with the writ petition and formally requested its withdrawal. This is a procedural matter where a party has the right to withdraw their case if they no longer wish to pursue it. Revenue/State's Argument: The respondents were represented, and no specific argument against the withdrawal was recorded in the judgment. The judgment does not indicate any objection raised by the revenue authorities to the petitioner's request for withdrawal.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
04 10.12. 2025 South CGST & CX Commissionerate and others. ---------------
Mr. Avra Mazumder, Ms. Alisha Das, Ms. Elina Dey, Ms. Maitreyee Naskar, Mr. Siddhartha Das. … for the petitioners.
Mr. Bhaskar Prosad Banerjee, Ms. Ekta Sinha. … for the CGST & CX Authority.
The affidavit-in-opposition filed on behalf of the respondents is taken on record.
Mr. Mazumder, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner, submits that the petitioner is not willing to pursue the writ petition any further and seeks withdrawal of the writ petition. He hands up to the Court a print out of e-mail dated September 18, 2025 written by the petitioner to the learned Advocate-on-Record for the petitioner. Let the same be taken on record.
The respondents are represented.
As prayed for, WPA 14485 of 2022 along with CAN 1 of 20
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 Calcutta High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.