Himalayan Heli Service LTD Th Wangchuk Shamshu vs. Union Of INDIA Th Secretary Ministry Of Finance New Delhi And Others

Facts

The petitioner, Himalayan Heli Service Ltd., filed a writ petition before the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh at Jammu. The petitioner sought to withdraw the petition with the liberty to approach the appropriate authority under Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017. A key submission was that the period the petition remained pending before the High Court should be excluded for the purpose of limitation when filing a statutory appeal against an appealable order. The respondents were the Union of India and others. The judgment does not specify the tax period or the specific order under challenge, nor the amount in dispute.

Held

The Court allowed the petitioner's request to withdraw the writ petition. The petitioner was granted liberty to approach the appropriate authority. Regarding the limitation period, the Court directed that the time spent by the petitioner in the High Court would not be reckoned towards the limitation for filing a statutory appeal. The petitioner was also given the liberty to move an appropriate application seeking exclusion of limitation, which would be decided by the competent authority in accordance with law. The Court also noted that the petitioner could approach the Registry for the release of any amount deposited in terms of a previous order of the Court, subject to verification. No specific issue was left undecided, as the petition was disposed of based on the petitioner's request.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner should be granted liberty to withdraw the writ petition to approach the appropriate authority under Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017? 2. Whether the time spent by the petitioner in prosecuting the writ petition before this Court should be excluded for the purpose of computing the period of limitation for filing a statutory appeal? Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner argued for withdrawal of the petition with liberty to approach the appropriate authority under Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017. They further contended that the time spent in the High Court should be excluded from the limitation period for filing a statutory appeal. The petitioner relied on the principle of allowing parties to pursue alternative remedies when appropriate. Revenue's Arguments: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the revenue or respondents.