Steel Authority Of INDIA LTD. vs. Union Of INDIA And Ors.
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Steel Authority of India Ltd., filed a writ petition before the High Court at Calcutta, Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction, Appellate Side. The petition was numbered WPA 29628 of 2024. The respondents were the Union of India and others, represented by CGST authorities and the State. The petitioner's counsel, on April 30, 2025, informed the Court that they had instructions to withdraw the writ petition, based on a communication dated April 10, 2025. The learned advocates for the respondents did not oppose this prayer.
Held
The Court held that since the petitioner's counsel had instructions to withdraw the writ petition and presented a communication dated April 10, 2025, and the respondents did not oppose this prayer, the writ petition should be dismissed as withdrawn. The Court directed that a copy of the communication dated April 10, 2025, be retained with the record. No specific provisions of the GST Act or Rules were discussed in relation to the substantive merits of the case, as the matter was decided on the procedural aspect of withdrawal.
Key Issues
1. Whether the writ petition can be dismissed as withdrawn upon the petitioner's request, in accordance with the communication dated April 10, 2025. The petitioner argued that they had received instructions to withdraw the writ petition and presented a communication dated April 10, 2025, to support this. The revenue (CGST authorities and the State) argued that they did not oppose the petitioner's prayer for withdrawal.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
8 30.04.2025 sb Ct 5
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURI ICTION APPELLATE SIDE
WPA 29628 of 2024
Steel Authority of India Ltd. Versus Union of India & Ors.
Mr. Tarun Chatterjee
Mr. Pratip Mukherjee
Mr. Soumya Sankar Chini
… For the petitioner.
Mr. Bhaskar Prosad Benerjee
Mr. Tapan Bhanja
… For the CGST authorities
Mr. A. Ray, Ld. GP,
Md. T. M. Siddiqui
Mr. Nilotpal Chatterjee
Mr. Tanoy Chakraborty
Mr. Saptak Sanyal
… For the State.
Learned advocate representing the petitioner by placing before this Court a communication dated 10th April, 2025 would submit that he has been instructed to withdraw the instant writ petition.
Let a copy of the aforesaid communication dated 10th April, 2025 be retained with the record.
Learned advocates representing the respondents do not oppose such prayer.
In view thereof, let the writ petition be dismissed as withdrawn.
(Raja Basu Chowdhury, J.)
2
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.