M/S Shree Bhagwati Steels vs. Union Of INDIA
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, M/s Shree Bhagwati Steels, through its proprietor Mr. Anil Kumar Gupta, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan, Bench at Jaipur. The respondents included the Union of India, various CGST authorities, and the State of Rajasthan through its Finance Secretary and Chief Commissioner of Commercial Tax Department. The petition challenged an unspecified order or action passed by one of the revenue authorities. The specific tax period(s) and the amount in dispute are not recorded in the judgment. The procedural history leading to the filing of the writ petition is also not detailed.
Held
The Court held that the petitioner's writ petition was not pressed. Consequently, the Court disposed of the petition as not pressed, granting the petitioner the liberty to avail the remedy of appeal as prayed for. The Court further directed that in the event the petitioner files an appeal along with an application for condonation of delay, the appellate authority shall consider the factum of the pendency of the writ petition. No specific findings were made on the merits of the underlying GST dispute, as the petition was withdrawn.
Key Issues
The primary issue before the Court was whether the petitioner's writ petition should be entertained. The petitioner, after arguing at length, sought permission to withdraw the petition with liberty to avail the remedy of appeal. The respondents were represented by their respective counsel. The Court had to decide whether to allow the withdrawal of the petition and grant the requested liberty, considering the pendency of the writ petition. The petitioner's argument was based on their desire to pursue an alternative remedy. The respondents' stance on this specific request is not explicitly recorded, beyond their representation by counsel.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
Order 22/05/2025
Learned counsel for the petitioner after arguing at length is not pressing the petition with liberty to avail remedy of appeal.
[2025:RJ-JP:21532-DB] (2 of 2) [CW-6891/2025]
The petition is disposed of as not pressed with liberty as prayed for.
In the eventuality of petitioner filing an appeal along with the application for condonation of delay, the appellate authority shall consider the factum of pendency of this petition. (MUKESH RAJPUROHIT),J (AVNEESH JHINGAN),J Chandan/18
Reproduced from the public record of the Rajasthan High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.