United Brothers Distilleries PVT LTD vs. The Union Of INDIA And Anr
Held
The Court held that good and sufficient cause has been explained by the learned counsel for the applicant for inadvertently omitting the prayer for extension of the interim order when mention for adjournment was made on September 18, 2024. Consequently, the prayer made in the Interlocutory Application stands allowed. The Court found no reason to deny the extension given the explained inadvertence. The operative direction was to allow the IA, thereby extending the interim order. No specific GST provisions were discussed in detail as the matter pertained to an interim order extension based on procedural oversight.
Facts
The petitioner, United Brothers Distilleries Pvt Ltd, filed an Interlocutory Application (IA) seeking extension of an interim order dated July 12, 2022, which was granted in a connected writ petition (WP(C) 203 (AP) 2024, formerly WP(C) 4614 of 2022). The petitioner's counsel explained that the matter was listed on September 18, 2024, and an adjournment was sought and allowed. However, due to an inadvertent omission, the prayer for extension of the interim order was not made. The Court noted that after the order for adjournment was signed and uploaded on September 18, 2024, the petitioner's counsel had made a verbal request for extension, but it could not be altered. The respondents opposed the prayer for extension.
Key Issues
1. Whether there is sufficient cause to allow the Interlocutory Application for extension of the interim order, considering the inadvertent omission by the petitioner's counsel. Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner argued that the omission to seek an extension of the interim order on September 18, 2024, was inadvertent and that good and sufficient cause has been explained for this oversight. They relied on the fact that a verbal request was made immediately after the order was uploaded. Revenue/State's Argument: The learned counsel for the respondents opposed the prayer for extension of the interim order.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Page No.# 1/3 GAHC040012592024
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH) Case No. : IA(C)/174/2024 United Brothers Distilleries Pvt Ltd Pappu Hills, Naharlagun, Arunachal Pradesh 791110 represented by its one of the Director, Mr Niraj Sharma, Son of Tek Chand Sharma, resident of 611-B, Beverly Park-1, Near MG Road, Sikhanderpur Ghosi (68) Gurgaon, HAryana, 122002
VERSUS The Union of India and Anr represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, having his office at 137, North Block, New Delhi 110001 2:The Principal Commissioner Age: 0 Occupation : CGST and CX Itanagar Commissionerate Sector A Naharlagun Arunachal Pradesh 79111 Advocate for the Petitioner : Tapi Omo, Advocate for the Respondent : Marto Kato, DSGI
-BEFORE- HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA 20.09.2024 Heard Mr. T. Omo, learned counsel for the applicant; Mr. K. Boro, learned counsel for respondent No. 2 and Mr. M. Kato, learned DSGI for respondent N
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 Gauhati High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.