M/S Ranthambhore Kothi vs. The Commissioner Of CGST
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, M/s Ranthambhore Kothi, filed a writ petition before the Rajasthan High Court. The petition challenged an action by the revenue authorities, specifically the Commissioner of CGST, Alwar, and the Superintendent, CGST, Alwar. The petitioner's GSTIN is 08Afeps3946N1Zr. The petition was filed against the Commissioner of CGST, the Superintendent of CGST, several banks (HDFC Bank Ltd., ICICI Bank Ltd., Axis Bank Ltd.), the State of Rajasthan through the Finance Secretary, and the Union of India through the Revenue Secretary. The core of the dispute, though not explicitly detailed in the provided text, appears to have involved a provisional attachment order issued by the revenue authorities. The tax period(s) and the specific amount in dispute are not stated in the judgment. The procedural history that matters is the filing of the writ petition and the subsequent withdrawal of the provisional attachment order.
Held
The Court held that the writ petition has become infructuous. This decision was based on the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the provisional attachment order, which formed the basis of the petition, had been withdrawn during the pendency of the writ petition. The Court accepted this statement and concluded that since the order under challenge was no longer in effect, the cause of action for the petition had ceased to exist. Consequently, the Court disposed of the petition as having rendered infructuous. The reasoning is straightforward: if the action complained of is withdrawn, there is no longer a live dispute for the court to adjudicate. The operative direction was to dispose of the petition. No issues were expressly left undecided.
Key Issues
1. Whether the present writ petition has become infructuous due to the withdrawal of the provisional attachment order by the revenue authorities. Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that the provisional attachment order, which was the basis for the writ petition, has been withdrawn during the pendency of the proceedings. Therefore, the cause of action for the petition no longer survives, rendering the petition infructuous. Revenue/State's contention: The judgment does not record any specific contention from the revenue or state respondents regarding the survival of the cause of action. However, their action of withdrawing the provisional attachment order implicitly acknowledges the petitioner's submission.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
[2025:RJ-JP:3328-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 849/2025 M/s Ranthambhore Kothi, (Gstin 08Afeps3946N1Zr ) Through Proprietor Mr. Rajendra Sood, Registered At Khasra No 4456, Ranthambhore
Road
Village-Khilchipur
Sawaimadhopur Rajasthan ----Petitioner Versus
The Commissioner Of Cgst, Central Goods And Services Tax Commissionerate Alwar, A Block, Surya Nagar, Alwar -301001
The Superintendent, Central Goods And Services Tax Commissionerate Alwar, A Block, Surya Nagar, Alwar -301001
Hdfc Bank Ltd., 19,20 Indra Colony Sawai Madhopur, Rajasthan 322001 Through Branch Manager
Icici Bank Ltd., Alanpur Link Road Sawai. Madhopur, Rajasthan 322001 Through Branch Manager
Axis Bank Ltd., Plot No. 8, Civil Lines Road, Inora Colony, Mantown, Sawai Maohopur, Rajasthan, 322001 Through Branch Manager
State Of Rajasthan Through The Finance Secretary (Revenue), Finance Department, Government Of Rajasthan, 1St Floor, Main Building, Government Secretariat, Janpath, Jaipur, Rajasthan- 302005. 7. Union Of India, Through The Revenue Secretary, Ministry Of Finance, North Block, New Delhi-110001. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Shradha Sareen with Mr. Aniket Sareen for Ms. Shradha Agarwal For Respondent(s) : Mr. Harish Kumar Tripathi Ms. Jaya Pathak for Mr. Sandeep Pathak HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SHUBHA MEHTA
[2025:RJ-JP:3328-DB] (2 of 2) [CW-849/2025] Order 23/01/2025
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that during pendency of the petition, provisional attachment order has been withdrawn, therefore, cause of action does not survive.
Placing on record the said statement, the present petition is disposed of as having rendered infructuous. (SHUBHA MEHTA),J (MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA),CJ Naval Kishore/Neeru/14
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.