M/S Ajay Refractories vs. The Principal Commissioner Of Customs

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Ajay Refractories, filed a Special Civil Application before the High Court of Gujarat challenging an action or order by the revenue authorities. The grievance raised in the petition pertained to the non-issuance of a refund. During the pendency of the petition, the competent authority issued a refund order. The revenue, represented by the Principal Commissioner of Customs, confirmed the issuance of this refund order. The refund amount was Rs. 18,10,804, which included Rs. 14,14,713 towards IGST and Rs. 3,96,091 as interest. A communication dated July 6, 2022, confirming the refund, was produced before the Court.

Held

The Court noted the submission made on behalf of the petitioner that the competent authority had already issued the refund order, which was the grievance in the petition. The learned advocate for the revenue confirmed the issuance of the refund order of Rs. 18,10,804, comprising Rs. 14,14,713 towards IGST and Rs. 3,96,091 as interest. A communication dated July 6, 2022, confirming this refund, was produced and taken on record. Based on these submissions and the confirmation of the refund, the Court found that the purpose of the petition had been fulfilled. Therefore, the Court allowed the petitioner's request to withdraw the petition. The ratio decidendi is that when the grievance raised in a writ petition is redressed by the respondent authority during the pendency of the petition, the petition can be disposed of as withdrawn.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner's grievance regarding the non-issuance of refund has been rendered infructuous by subsequent action of the revenue authorities, thereby warranting withdrawal of the petition? Petitioner's contention: The petitioner, through their learned advocate, sought permission to withdraw the petition on the instruction that the competent authority had already issued the refund order, which was the subject matter of the grievance. Revenue's contention: The revenue, through their learned advocate, confirmed the issuance of the refund order for the specified amount, thereby substantiating the petitioner's claim for withdrawal. The revenue produced a communication dated July 6, 2022, from the Assistant Commissioner (IGST) confirming the refund.