Gupta Sons Through Its Partner Sanjeev Gupta vs. Union Of INDIA And Others

Facts

The petitioner, Gupta Sons, through its partner Sanjeev Gupta, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana. The petition was filed against the Union of India and others. The petitioner sought relief related to the Goods and Services Tax (GST) regime. During the pendency of the writ petition, which had been adjourned sine die, the petitioner filed an application seeking withdrawal of the main petition. This withdrawal was sought in light of a decision by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in a batch of Special Leave Petitions (SLP(C) Nos. 7425-7428 of 2020). The respondent-UT, Chandigarh, was present and accepted notice on the application.

Held

The Court noted that the petitioner sought withdrawal of the main petition in terms of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP(C) Nos. 7425-7428 of 2020. The Supreme Court, in its order dated 22.07.2022, had directed the Goods and Services Tax Network (GSTN) to open a common portal for filing concerned forms for availing Transitional Credit through TRAN-1 and TRAN-2 for two months. It also directed that any aggrieved registered assessee could file or revise the already filed form, irrespective of whether a writ petition was filed or if the case was decided by the ITGRC. The concerned officers were given 90 days thereafter to verify the claims and pass appropriate orders. In light of the Supreme Court's directions and the respondent's submission of meticulous compliance, the counsel for the petitioner did not press the instant petition. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to withdraw the writ petition in light of the directions issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union of India and another versus Filco Trade Centre Pvt. Ltd. and another (SLP(C) Nos. 7425-7428 of 2020) dated 22.07.2022? The petitioner argued that the Supreme Court's order provides a mechanism for taxpayers to file or revise forms for availing transitional credit, which addresses the underlying grievance that likely led to the filing of the writ petition. Therefore, the petitioner sought to withdraw the petition to avail the benefit of the Supreme Court's directions. The respondent-UT, Chandigarh, stated that there would be meticulous compliance with the directions of the Apex Court and did not object to the withdrawal of the petition.