M/S Fiza Construction Company vs. The Assistant Commissioner (Audit)
Facts
The petitioner, M/s Fiza Construction Company, through its Partner Mr. Md. Junaid, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Chhattisgarh, Bilaspur. The respondents were the Assistant Commissioner (Audit) and the Superintendent (Audit) of the Large Audit Group-3, GST Bhawan, Raipur, and the Union of India through its Secretary, Department of Revenue. The writ petition was filed challenging an order or action by the revenue authorities. The specific tax period(s) and the exact nature of the order or action under challenge, as well as the amount in dispute, are not detailed in the provided text. The procedural history leading to the filing of the writ petition is also not elaborated.
Held
The Court held that the writ petition was to be dismissed as not pressed. This decision was based on the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, who stated that a compromise had already taken place between the parties and that the petitioner no longer wished to press the present petition. The respondents did not oppose this submission. Consequently, the Court found no reason to proceed with the adjudication of the matter on its merits. The ratio decidendi is that if a petitioner unequivocally states that they do not wish to press their petition due to a compromise and the respondents do not object, the Court will dismiss the petition on that basis without delving into the underlying dispute. No specific operative directions were issued beyond the dismissal.
Key Issues
The primary issue before the Court was whether the writ petition filed by M/s Fiza Construction Company should be entertained. The petitioner's counsel submitted that a compromise had been reached between the parties. This submission implies that the petitioner no longer wished to pursue the legal challenge. The respondents did not oppose this submission. Therefore, the Court did not have to decide on the substantive merits of any GST-related dispute or interpret any specific provisions of the GST law. The core question was whether to dismiss the petition based on the petitioner's statement of compromise and withdrawal.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
1 NAFR H IGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
WPT No. 238 of 2023 M/s Fiza Construction Company Through Its Partner Mr. Md. Junaid, Having Its Office At Mai Road, Shitlapara, Kanker, Chhattisgarh - 494334. ---- Petitioner Versus 1 - The Assistant Commissioner (Audit) Large Audit Group-3, Gst Bhawan, Dhamtari Road, Tikrapara, Raipur (C.G.) 492001. 2 - The Superintendent (Audit) Large Audit Group-3, Gst Bhawan, Dhamtari Road, Tikrapara, Raipur (C.G.) 492001. 3 - The Union Of India Through Its Secretary, Department Of Revenue, Ministry Of Finance, North Block, New Delhi - 110001. ---- Respondents (Cause title taken from Case Information System) ____________________________________________________________ For Petitioner : Mr. Harshmander Rastogi, Advocate For Respondents No.1 & 2: Mr. Maneesh Sharma, Advocate For Respondent No.3 : Ms. Shweta Rai, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Ramakant Mishra, Dy. S.G. ____________________________________________________________ Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal Order on Board 26/07/2024
At the outset, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the compromise has already been taken place between the partie
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 Chhattisgarh High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.