S Mahendran vs. The Superintendent Of Central CGST And Excise

Held

The Court noted the submissions made by both the learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondent. The petitioner sought to withdraw the writ petition and requested liberty to file an appeal against the impugned order, offering to deposit 20% of the disputed tax. The respondent's counsel agreed to this course of action. Consequently, the Court dismissed the writ petition, granting the petitioner liberty to file an appeal before the Appellate Authority within three weeks from the date of receiving a copy of the order. This liberty was made conditional upon the petitioner pre-depositing 20% of the disputed tax before the Appellate Authority. No costs were awarded, and the connected miscellaneous petitions were closed.

Facts

The petitioner, S. Mahendran, filed a writ petition before the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court challenging an order passed by the Superintendent of Central CGST and Excise, Tenkasi Range, dated April 24, 2024, and a consequential summary order in Form GST DRC-07 dated May 2, 2024. The petitioner sought to quash these orders as illegal, without jurisdiction, and in violation of natural justice. The learned counsel for the petitioner sought permission to withdraw the petition, requesting liberty to file an appeal against the impugned order. The petitioner also expressed willingness to deposit 20% of the disputed tax as a statutory pre-deposit and an additional 10% for the delay in filing the appeal.

Key Issues

1. Whether the impugned order passed by the Respondent, the Superintendent of Central CGST and Excise, Tenkasi Range, and the consequential summary order in Form GST DRC-07 are illegal, without jurisdiction, and in gross violation of the Principles of Natural Justice, as contended by the petitioner. The petitioner argued for the quashing of these orders. The respondent, through their counsel, agreed to the course of action proposed by the petitioner, which involved the withdrawal of the writ petition and the liberty to file an appeal. No specific arguments were recorded for the respondent beyond their agreement to the petitioner's request.