Pakker Md Ismail (Proprietor Of M/S Blue Moon Fragrances) vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Customs (Import)

Held

The Court found the explanation provided by the petitioner for the non-appearance of their learned advocate at the time of the hearing on January 25, 2018, to be satisfactory. Consequently, the Court recalled the order dated January 25, 2018, which had dismissed the writ petition. The writ petition was restored to its original file and number. The application for recall was disposed of, and the main writ petition was directed to be listed in the monthly list of August 2023 for further hearing on its merits. No decision was made on the substantive issues of the writ petition itself, as the focus was solely on the procedural restoration.

Facts

The petitioner, Pakker Md. Ismail, filed a writ petition (WPA 27184 of 2015) before the High Court. The writ petition was dismissed on January 25, 2018, due to the non-appearance of the petitioner's advocate. The petitioner subsequently filed an application (CAN 1/2018, formerly CAN 1248/2018) seeking recall of the dismissal order and restoration of the writ petition. The petitioner provided an explanation for the non-appearance, which the Court found satisfactory.

Key Issues

1. Whether the explanation provided by the petitioner for the non-appearance of their advocate on January 25, 2018, is satisfactory to warrant the recall of the dismissal order and restoration of the writ petition. Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner argued that the non-appearance was due to reasons that were satisfactory and that the writ petition should be restored to its original file and number to be heard on merits. Revenue/State's Argument: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the CGST Authority, Customs, or the Union of India regarding the application for recall. Their appearance is noted, but their contentions on this specific procedural matter are not detailed.