Tvl.English Cotton vs. The Union Of INDIA

Facts

The petitioner, Tvl.English Cotton, represented by its Proprietor, filed a writ petition before the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court. The petition challenged Notification No.56/2023 - Central Tax dated 28.12.2023 issued by the 1st respondent (Union of India), G.O (Ms.) No.1 and Notification dated 02.01.2024 issued by the 3rd respondent (State of Tamil Nadu), and an order dated 16.04.2024 issued by the 5th respondent (State Tax Officer) pertaining to GSTIN: 33ADUPR5060Q1ZO/2018-2019. The petitioner sought to quash these notifications and the order, alleging they were arbitrary, void, contrary to Section 168A of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and violative of Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India. The matter was listed for clarification after being reserved for orders.

Held

The Court recorded the submission and endorsement made by the learned counsel for the petitioner seeking permission to withdraw the writ petition. Based on this submission, the Court dismissed the writ petition as withdrawn. No costs were imposed. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions were also closed. The Court did not delve into the merits of the challenges raised by the petitioner against the notifications and the order, as the petition was withdrawn at the instance of the petitioner's counsel. Therefore, no findings were made on the validity or legality of the impugned notifications or the order, nor were any specific provisions of the GST Act or the Constitution discussed in relation to the merits of the case. The operative direction was solely to dismiss the petition as withdrawn.

Key Issues

1. Whether Notification No.56/2023 - Central Tax dated 28.12.2023, G.O (Ms.) No.1 and Notification dated 02.01.2024 issued by the State, and the order dated 16.04.2024 issued by the State Tax Officer are manifestly arbitrary, void, contrary to Section 168A of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and violative of Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India. The petitioner contended that the impugned notifications and order were illegal, without jurisdiction, and against the provisions of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner sought to quash these actions. The respondents, Union of India and the State of Tamil Nadu through its officials, were represented. The judgment does not record specific arguments made by the respondents.