M/S Pareek Constructions vs. The Union Of INDIA And 4 Ors
Held
The Court held that the writ petition stands closed. This decision was based on the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the matter had become infructuous. The Court did not delve into the merits of the original grievance or the specific GST provisions involved. The reasoning is solely predicated on the petitioner's counsel's statement regarding the current status of the case. The ratio decidendi is that if a party to a writ petition submits that the matter has become infructuous, the High Court may close the petition without further adjudication on the merits. No operative directions were issued, and no issues were expressly left undecided beyond the closure of the petition.
Facts
The petitioner, M/s Pareek Constructions, a partnership firm, filed a writ petition before the Gauhati High Court. The respondents were the Union of India and various GST authorities, including the Commissioner of Central Tax, Assistant Commissioner, and Superintendents. The specific tax period and the order or action under challenge are not detailed in the provided text. The procedural history indicates that the matter was brought before the High Court via a writ petition. The counsel for the petitioner made a submission that the matter had become infructuous.
Key Issues
1. Whether the writ petition has become infructuous, thereby warranting its closure? The petitioner's counsel argued that the matter had become infructuous. The respondents' arguments are not recorded in the provided text. The issue hinges on the current status and relevance of the original grievance that led to the filing of the writ petition.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Page No.# 1/2 GAHC010068362022
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/2521/2022 M/S PAREEK CONSTRUCTIONS A PARTNERSHIP FIRM HAVING ITS PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS AT A/001, SARBANANDA ROAD, P.O.- TINSUKIA, DIST.- TINSUKIA- 786125, ASSAM REP. BY ONE OF ITS PARTNERS, SRI GIRDHARILAL PAREEK, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS. VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND 4 ORS REP. BY THE SECY. TO THE MINISTRY OF FINANCE, DEPTT. OF REVENUE, GOVT. OF INDIA, NEW DELHI. 2:THE COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DIVISION DIBRUGARH 786001 ASSAM. 3:THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER TINSUKIA CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DIVISION TINSUKIA- 786123 ASSAM. 4:THE SUPERINTENDENT CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICES TAX NORTH LAKHIMPUR RANGE K.B. ROAD NORTH LAKHIMPUR ASSAM. 5:THE SUPERINTENDENT ANTI EVASION UNIT CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICES TAX
Page No.# 2/2 TINSUKIA RUNGAGORA DURGABARI TINSUKIA- 786125 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. O P BHATI Advocate for the Respondent : ASSTT.S.G.I.
BEFORE HONOUR
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 Gauhati High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.