Amit Kumar vs. Union Of INDIA
Held
The Court accepted the statement made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and allowed the withdrawal of the present writ petition. The petitioner was granted liberty to prefer an appeal against the demand of service tax. The Court also accepted the statement made by the learned counsel for the respondents, directing that if an appeal is preferred within a period of four weeks from the date of the order, the issue of limitation shall not be a bar to its consideration and decision on merits. The petition was disposed of as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty. No specific finding was given on the merits of the service tax demand as the petition was withdrawn.
Facts
The petitioner, Amit Kumar, proprietor of M/s PARADISE AUTOMOBILES, filed a writ petition before the Patna High Court. The petition challenged an action by the Central GST and Central Excise authorities. The core of the dispute involved a demand of Rs. [amount not specified in the judgment] related to service tax under the Finance Act, 1994. The petitioner sought to withdraw the writ petition to prefer an appeal. The respondents, represented by the Union of India through the Commissioner of Central GST and Central Excise, Patna-II, and the Deputy/Assistant Commissioner, Central GST and Central Excise, Begusarai Division, did not object to the withdrawal.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner should be granted permission to withdraw the present writ petition with liberty to prefer an appeal, considering the nature of the challenge to a demand of service tax under the Finance Act, 1994? Petitioner's contention: The petitioner, through learned counsel, sought permission to withdraw the writ petition under instruction, reserving the liberty to prefer an appeal against the impugned demand. No specific legal arguments were presented regarding the merits of the demand itself within the context of the writ petition withdrawal. Revenue's contention: The learned counsel for the respondents stated that if an appeal is preferred within four weeks from the date of the order, the issue of limitation would not impede its consideration and decision on merits. No arguments were made against the withdrawal of the writ petition.
Sections Cited
Finance Act, 1994
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13500 of 2022 ====================================================== Amit Kumar S/o Shri Sudhir Prasad Sah (Proprietor- M/s PARADISE AUTOMOBILES), At NH- 107, Hatiya Gachhi, Saharsa and Presently Residing at Ganpat Apartment, Flat No. 502, Block C, Dhumsa Toli, Bahu Barar, Chutia, Ranchi, GPO, Ranchi, Jharkhand 83400 ... ... Petitioner/s Versus
Union of India through the Commissioner of Central GST and Central Excise, Patna- II, 3rd to 5th Floor, CTTC Building Sanchar Parishar, Buddha Marg, Patna- 800001. 2. The Deputy/Assistant Commissioner, Central GST and Central Excise, Begusarai Division. At Bagha, Raghuvar Nagar, Ward No. 29, P.O.- Suhird Nagar, Begusarai- 851218. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Amit Pandey, Advocate For the UOI : Mr. Anshuman Singh, Sr. SC, CGST & CX ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) Date : 12-10-2022 Petitioner has prayed
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 Patna High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.