M/S Dholagiri Enterprises vs. Chief Commissioner Central Goods And Service Tax Panchkula And Ors
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, M/s Dholagiri Enterprises, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated January 11, 2022. During the pendency of this petition, the respondents, represented by the Chief Commissioner Central Goods and Service Tax, Panchkula, and others, passed a fresh order on January 20, 2023. This new order was for the provisional attachment of the petitioner's bank account, issued under Section 83 of the CGST Act, 2017, by the Commissioner, CGST & Central Excise, Panchkula. The High Court noted that since a fresh order had been passed, the original writ petition was being disposed of.
Held
The High Court held that the writ petition challenging the order dated January 11, 2022, was to be disposed of. This decision was based on the fact that the respondents had subsequently passed a fresh order on January 20, 2023, for the provisional attachment of the petitioner's bank account under Section 83 of the CGST Act, 2017. The Court reasoned that the existence of this new order rendered the challenge to the older order moot. Consequently, the Court granted liberty to the petitioner to challenge the freshly passed order dated January 20, 2023, in accordance with the law, if they were advised to do so. No specific finding was made on the merits of the original order dated January 11, 2022, nor were any issues expressly left undecided beyond the liberty granted.
Key Issues
1. Whether the High Court should entertain the writ petition challenging the order dated January 11, 2022, when a subsequent order dated January 20, 2023, has been passed by the revenue authorities. Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner had approached the High Court challenging the order dated January 11, 2022. The subsequent order, while related, is a new action that may require a fresh challenge. Respondents' Contention: The respondents presented the fresh order dated January 20, 2023, indicating that the earlier order under challenge was superseded. They submitted this to the Court, implying that the current writ petition, as originally framed, might be rendered infructuous or require modification.
Sections Cited
Section 83
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Neutral Citation No.: 2023:PHHC:038129-DB IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 282 CWP-941-2022 Date of Decision : March 09, 2023 M/S DHOLAGIRI ENTERPRISES .....Petitioner VERSUS CHIEF COMMISSIONER CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICE TAX PANCHKULA AND ORS. .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI Present : Mr. H.S. Brar, Advocate with Mr. Kanwal Goyal, Advocate and Mr. Govind Tanwar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Sourabh Goel, Sr. Standing Counsel, assisted by Ms. Shivani Sahni, Advocate for the respondents. *** RITU BAHRI
, J.(ORAL)
The learned counsel appearing for the respondents has handed over a copy of the order dated 20.01.2023, whereby, the Commissioner, CGST & Central Excise, Panchkula, has passed a fresh order for provisional attachment of the bank account, under Section 83 of the CGST Act, 2017. The petitioner was challenging the order dated 11.01.2022, Annexure P-4, however, since a fresh order has been passed, the instant writ petition is being disposed of by giving liberty to the petitioner to challenge the freshly passed order in accordance with law, if so advised.
Disposed of accordingly. (RITU BAHRI) JUDGE (KULDEEP TIWARI) March 09, 2023 JUDGE devinder Whether speaking/reasoned. : Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No DEVINDER YADAV 2023.03.13 16:50 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment
Reproduced from the public record of the Punjab and Haryana High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.