The Tollygunge Club LTD vs. Principal Commissioner Of CGST And Cx And Ors
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, The Tollygunge Club Limited, filed a writ petition (WPA 10734 of 2021) before the Calcutta High Court. The respondents were the Principal Commissioner of CGST & CX and others. On February 24, 2025, the petitioner's advocate informed the Court that they had received instructions to withdraw the writ petition. The advocate placed a communication dated February 15, 2025, from the petitioner to their advocate, supporting this instruction. The learned advocate for the respondent CGST authorities did not oppose the prayer for withdrawal. An affidavit-in-opposition filed by the respondents was also taken on record.
Held
The Court held that the writ petition should be dismissed as withdrawn. This decision was based on the explicit prayer made by the petitioner's counsel, who stated they had received instructions to withdraw the petition. The Court noted that the learned advocate for the respondent CGST authorities did not oppose this prayer. Consequently, the Court allowed the withdrawal and dismissed the writ petition. The operative direction was to dismiss the writ petition as withdrawn. No specific issues regarding GST law were decided, as the matter was resolved by the petitioner's request to withdraw.
Key Issues
1. Whether the writ petition can be dismissed as withdrawn based on the petitioner's instructions. The petitioner argued that they had instructed their counsel to withdraw the writ petition. The revenue or State did not present any arguments against this prayer, as their learned advocate stated they did not oppose the withdrawal. No specific provisions of the GST Act or Rules were cited in relation to the withdrawal itself, but the context is a writ petition filed under the jurisdiction of the High Court.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
1 24.02.2025 sb Ct 5
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURI ICTION APPELLATE SIDE
WPA 10734 of 2021
The Tollygunge Club Limited Versus Principal Commissioner of CGST & CX & Ors.
Mr. Bhaskar Sengupta
… For the petitioner.
Mr. Tapan Bhanja
… For the CGST authorities.
Learned advocate representing the petitioner, by placing before this Court a communication dated 15th February, 2025, issued on behalf of the petitioner addressed to the petitioner’s advocate, would submit that he has been instructed to withdraw the writ petition. Mr. Bhanja, learned advocate representing the respondent CGST authorities does not oppose such prayer.
Let a copy of the communication dated 15th February, 2025 as placed before this Court be retained with the record.
Affidavit-in-opposition filed in Court today on behalf of the respondent CGST authorities is taken on record.
Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties and on the basis of the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner, let the writ petition, being WPA 10734 of 2021, 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.