M/S Pareek Steel And Hardware vs. The Union Of INDIA And 4 Ors
Held
The Court allowed the interlocutory application for amendment. The reasoning was straightforward: the counsel for the GST Department did not object to the proposed amendments. Therefore, the Court directed that paragraphs 17A, 17B, and 17C be added after paragraph 17 of the writ petition, and grounds 19(xiv) to 19(xvi) be added after ground 19(xiii). The Court also directed that the earlier prayer in the writ petition be substituted with the prayer stated in paragraph 5 of the interlocutory application. The petitioner was further directed to file a consolidated writ petition incorporating all the allowed amendments. No specific issue regarding the merits of the SVLDR Scheme rejection was decided, as the application was purely procedural.
Facts
The petitioner, M/s Pareek Steel and Hardware, a sole proprietorship, filed an interlocutory application seeking to amend their existing writ petition (WP(C) No. 2152/2020). The original writ petition was filed challenging the rejection of a declaration made by the petitioner under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Disputes Resolution) Scheme, 2019 (SVLDR Scheme). The interlocutory application sought to add new paragraphs (17A, 17B, and 17C) and new grounds for challenge (19(xiv) to 19(xvi)) to the writ petition, and also to substitute the existing prayer with a new one. The respondents, including the Union of India and various GST authorities, were represented by counsel.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner should be allowed to amend their writ petition to include additional paragraphs, grounds, and a substituted prayer, in relation to the rejection of their declaration under the SVLDR Scheme, 2019? Contentions: Petitioner: Sought to amend the writ petition to incorporate further details and a revised prayer concerning the rejection of their SVLDR Scheme declaration. Revenue/State: Did not object to the proposed amendments sought by the petitioner.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010070242020
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/1767/2020 M/S PAREEK STEEL AND HARDWARE Address:A SOLE-PROPRIETORSHIP CONCERN HAVING THEIR PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS AT SHOP NO.1 KEJRIWAL COMPLEX SATI JOYMATI ROAD SHARMA GALI ATHGAON GHY-01 KAMRUP (M) ASSAM AND REP. THROUGH THEIR SOLE PROPRIETOR- SRI MADAN PAREEK AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS S/O- LT. NARSINGH RAI PAREEK VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND 4 ORS Address:REP. BY THE SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA MINISTRY OF FINANCE DEPTT. OF REVENUE CENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT TAXES AND CUSTOMS NORTH BLOCK NEW DELHI- 110001 2:THE COMM. OF CENTRAL EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX Address:MORELLO COMPOUND SHILLONG- 793001 (MEGHALAYA) 3:THE COMM. OF CENTRAL EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX Address:GUWAHATI DIVISION G S ROAD GHY-05 4:THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX Address:(MEMBER-DESIGNATED COMMITTEE UNDER SVLDR SCHEME
Page No.# 2/3 2019) G S ROAD GHY-05 5:THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX Address:(MEMBER-DESIGNATED COMMITTEE UNDER SVLDR SCHEME 2019) G S RO
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 Gauhati High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.