M/S Trish Corporation Ludhiana vs. State Of Punjab And Others
Facts
The petitioner, M/s Trish Corporation, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana challenging an order. During the pendency of the petition, the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax-Cum-Proper Officer, SIPU, Patiala, passed a subsequent order dated 27.12.2024. The parties agreed that this subsequent order is appealable under Section 107 of the Punjab Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner's counsel sought permission to withdraw the writ petition to pursue the statutory remedy of appeal.
Held
The Court accepted the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the order dated 27.12.2024, passed by the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax-Cum-Proper Officer, SIPU, Patiala, is appealable under Section 107 of the Punjab Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. Consequently, the Court permitted the petitioner to withdraw the writ petition to enable them to avail the remedy of appeal. The Court did not delve into the merits of the original order or the subsequent order, as the matter was disposed of on the procedural aspect of withdrawal.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner should be permitted to withdraw the writ petition to avail the statutory remedy of appeal against the order dated 27.12.2024, passed by the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax-Cum-Proper Officer, SIPU, Patiala, under Section 107 of the Punjab Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017? Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that since a subsequent order has been passed which is appealable under Section 107 of the Punjab Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, they should be allowed to withdraw the present writ petition to pursue the appellate remedy. Revenue's contention: The respondents, represented by the Additional Advocate General, Punjab, agreed with the petitioner's submission that the subsequent order is appealable and did not oppose the withdrawal of the petition.
Sections Cited
Section 107
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.34223 of 2024 (O&M) Date of Decision :27.01.2025 M/s Trish Corporation ......Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others ...... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ARUN PALLI HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA Present : Mr. Aman Bansal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Saurabh Kapoor, Addl. A.G. Punjab. ARUN PALLI, J.
(Oral)
: Learned counsel for the parties are ad idem that during the pendency of the petition the order dated 27.12.2024, has since been passed by the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax-Cum-Proper Officer, SIPU, Patiala, which is appealable under Section 107 of the Punjab Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. Accordingly, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he be permitted to withdraw the petition so as to enable the petitioner to avail the remedy of appeal. Dismissed as withdrawn. (ARUN PALLI) JUDGE (SUDEEPTI SHARMA) JUDGE 27.01.2025 Manoj Bhutani Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No MANOJ KUMAR 2025.01.28 09:21 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
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.