M/S Mm Steel Industries vs. Commissioner Of State Taxes And Anr
Facts
The petitioner, M/s M.M. Steel Industries, approached the High Court of Punjab and Haryana through a writ petition. The petitioner sought relief concerning an order or action by the respondents, Commissioner of State Taxes and another. The judgment does not specify the tax period(s) or the exact nature of the order under challenge, nor does it mention any specific amount in dispute. The procedural history indicates that the petitioner had not filed an appeal before the Appellate Authority to date.
Held
The Court noted the petitioner's reference to a Karnataka High Court judgment where delay in filing an appeal was condoned under Article 226 of the Constitution, leading to the setting aside of the impugned order and remittance of the matter for fresh consideration. However, the Court observed that in the present case, the petitioner had not yet filed any appeal before the Appellate Authority. Therefore, the Court disposed of the writ petition with liberty to the petitioner to file an appropriate application for condonation of delay along with the appeal before the Appellate Authority. The Court did not decide on the merits of the case or the applicability of the Karnataka High Court judgment to the present facts, as the primary issue was the procedural step of filing the appeal.
Key Issues
1. Whether the High Court, in its writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, can condone the delay in filing an appeal before the Appellate Authority, thereby setting aside an order and remitting the matter for reconsideration. Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner referred to a Karnataka High Court judgment in M/s Himalaya Drug Company Vs. Commissioner of Central Tax (Appeals – II), where a similar delay was condoned, and the matter was remitted back to the authorities. This suggests an argument that the High Court has the power to grant such relief. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific arguments from the revenue or state respondents.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
128 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-4540-2023(O&M) Date of Decision:09.03.2023 M/s M.M.Steel Industries
....... Petitioner Versus Commissioner of State Taxes and another ...... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI *** Present: Mr.Akashdeep Miglani, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms.Anu Pal, Sr. DAG, Punjab. *** RITU BAHRI, J.(ORAL) Counsel has referred to a judgment passed by Karnataka High Court in M/s Himalaya Drug Company Vs. Commissioner of Central Tax (Appeals – II), Additional Commissioner of Central Tax, Central Excise and Service Tax, GST Commissionerate, Bengluru, Writ Petition No. 10142 of 2021 decided on 08.09.2022, where, while exercising powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the Court has condoned the delay in preferring the appeal filed by the petitioner by setting aside the impugned order and remitted the matter back to the authorities concerned for reconsideration of the appeal and deciding the same afresh in accordance with law. However, in the present case the petitioner has not filed any such appeal till date before the Appellate Authority. In this
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.