M/S Tara Enterprises, Through Its Partner Pawan Kumar vs. The Union Of INDIA

Held

The Court granted the petitioner's request to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to file an appeal against the impugned order. The Court directed the appellate authority to hear the appeal on merits without considering the issue of limitation, provided the appeal is filed within two weeks from the date of the order and all requisite formalities are complied with. This direction was given because the petitioner was pursuing the matter before the High Court, and there were noted issues with the Tribunal's functioning at the time of filing the writ petition. The Court explicitly stated that all contentions of all parties on merits are left open to be decided by the appellate authority. No specific provisions of the CGST Act or Rules were discussed in relation to the merits of the case.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Tara Enterprises, through its partner Pawan Kumar, filed a writ petition before the Jharkhand High Court. The petition challenged an order passed by the Assistant Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise, Deoghar, and subsequently, the Commissioner (Appeals), Central Goods and Service Tax & Central Excise, Ranchi. The specific tax period and the amount in dispute are not recorded in the judgment. The procedural history indicates that the petitioner was pursuing the matter before the High Court, and there was an issue regarding the functioning of the Tribunal at the time the petition was filed.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner should be granted leave to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to file an appeal against the impugned order? 2. Whether the appellate authority should be directed to hear the appeal on merits without considering the issue of limitation, given the circumstances? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner, through its counsel, sought leave to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to file an appeal against the impugned order. The petitioner also contended that the appeal should be heard on merits without being dismissed on grounds of limitation, as the matter was being pursued before the High Court, and there were issues with the Tribunal's functioning when the petition was filed. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific arguments or contentions made by the respondents (Union of India, Commissioner (Appeals), and Assistant Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise).