M/S. Manikanta Traders vs. Assistant Commissioner

Facts

The petitioner, M/s. Manikanta Traders, filed a Review Application seeking to review an order dated 02.01.2025 passed by the High Court in Writ Petition No. 29539 of 2024. The original writ petition challenged certain notifications extending time limits and also contended that the show-cause notices and assessment orders were unsigned. The earlier order in the writ petition had upheld the notifications and relegated the petitioners to the remedy of appeal. However, during the review hearing, the parties reached a consensus. The consensus was that the issue of unsigned show-cause notices and assessment orders had been finally decided by the Court in a batch of cases, specifically WP.No.21101 of 2024 and batch. Consequently, the parties agreed that the petitioner should not be relegated to the remedy of appeal in this case.

Held

The Court held that in view of the consensus arrived at between the parties, the order under review stands modified. Specifically, the Court ordered that the show-cause notice and the impugned assessment orders, which were unsigned, are set aside. The Court reserved liberty to the respondents to issue fresh show-cause notices in accordance with law and proceed further. The Court also stated that other conditions mentioned in the order passed in WP.No.21101 of 2024 and batch would apply mutatis mutandis to this case. The ratio of this decision is that where parties reach a consensus on a specific issue that has been definitively decided in related proceedings, the High Court can modify its previous order to grant relief based on that consensus, even if it involves setting aside prior notices or orders, provided liberty is granted to the revenue to initiate fresh proceedings.

Key Issues

1. Whether the order dated 02.01.2025 passed in Writ Petition No. 29539 of 2024, which upheld certain notifications and relegated the petitioner to the remedy of appeal, requires review in light of a subsequent consensus between the parties regarding unsigned show-cause notices and assessment orders. Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the original writ petition had raised a ground concerning unsigned show-cause notices and assessment orders. They contended that this issue has since been finally decided by the Court in a batch of other writ petitions (WP.No.21101 of 2024 and batch). Therefore, the petitioner should not be relegated to the remedy of appeal, and the previous order should be modified to address this specific issue. Revenue/State's Contention: The revenue/state, represented by the Assistant Commissioner and the State of Telangana, agreed with the petitioner's submission. They reached a consensus that the order under review should be modified to reflect the final decision on the issue of unsigned notices and orders, thereby avoiding the need for the petitioner to pursue an appeal.