Agrl vs. Union Of INDIA And Ors

Held

The Court held that there were no grounds to review its judgment dated November 4, 2019. Firstly, the Court found that the review application was an attempt to re-agitate the matter, which is not permissible within the parameters of seeking a review. Secondly, the Court reiterated its earlier findings from the November 4, 2019 judgment, which stated that unutilized credit arising from duty/tax paid under erstwhile Acts is a vested right that cannot be taken away on procedural or technical grounds. The Court noted that while its earlier judgment was fortified by the Gujarat High Court's view, it had also relied on a similar view expressed by the Delhi High Court. The Court concluded that the mere fact that the Gujarat High Court had stayed the implementation of its judgment in review was not a sufficient ground to review its own judgment. The Court suggested that the appropriate remedy for the Revenue would be to approach the Supreme Court by filing an appeal. The Court dismissed the present review application in terms of its earlier dismissal order dated November 29, 2019.

Facts

The Union of India (UOI) filed a review application seeking to review a judgment and order dated November 4, 2019, passed by the Punjab & Haryana High Court. This earlier judgment had allowed writ petitions, directing the respondents to permit the petitioners to file Form 'TRAN-1' by an extended date. The UOI's review application was filed with a delay of nine days, which the Court condoned. The UOI's primary argument was that the Gujarat High Court's judgment, relied upon by the Punjab & Haryana High Court, was itself under review, and its implementation had been stayed. The Court noted that a previous review application by the UOI in a similar matter had been dismissed on November 29, 2019. Furthermore, the UOI's Special Leave Petition against a related order was also dismissed by the Supreme Court.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Court should review its judgment dated November 4, 2019, allowing petitioners to file Form 'TRAN-1' by an extended date, in light of the Gujarat High Court staying the implementation of its similar judgment under review. Petitioner's Arguments: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the petitioner in this review application. However, the context implies the petitioner sought to uphold the original order allowing the filing of Form TRAN-1. Revenue/State's Arguments: The Union of India argued that the judgment of the Gujarat High Court, which was relied upon by this Court in its November 4, 2019 judgment, was itself under review, and the Gujarat High Court had stayed its implementation. Therefore, the UOI contended that the present judgment should also be reviewed.