Uflex LTD Th Varun Kumar Sharma vs. Union Of INDIA Th Deptt Of Revenue Ministry Of Finance And Others
Held
The Court, in agreement with the submissions of both learned counsel for the parties, disposed of the writ petition along with connected applications. The Court requested the learned Tribunal (CESTAT) to decide the appeal filed by the petitioner as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of the order. Following the Tribunal's decision, Respondent No. 3 (Assistant Commissioner, Central GST) was directed to pass an appropriate order pursuant to the notice dated 09.12.2021. This order was to be passed after permitting the petitioner to respond to the notice, and within a period of six weeks thereafter. The Court did not delve into the merits of the original dispute or the OIO/OIA.
Facts
The petitioner, UFLEX Ltd., filed a writ petition before the High Court challenging an Order in Original (OIO) dated 13.03.2019. During the pendency of the writ petition, the OIO was set aside by an Order in Appeal (OIA) dated 06.01.2023. The petitioner then assailed the OIA before the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) and also filed an application for early hearing of their appeal before the Tribunal. The matter came before the High Court again, where both parties agreed on a procedural resolution. The respondent is the Union of India and its authorities, including the Assistant Commissioner, Central GST.
Key Issues
1. Whether the High Court should direct the CESTAT to decide the appeal filed by the petitioner against the Order in Appeal dated 06.01.2023 within a specific timeframe. 2. Whether the High Court should direct Respondent No. 3 (Assistant Commissioner, Central GST) to pass an appropriate order pursuant to the notice dated 09.12.2021, after permitting the petitioner to respond to the same, within a specific timeframe. Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that they have filed an application for early hearing before the CESTAT, but the matter has not been considered. They seek a direction for the expeditious disposal of their appeal by the Tribunal and subsequent appropriate orders from the GST authorities. Revenue's Contention: The revenue, through its counsel, agreed with the petitioner's submissions regarding the procedural directions to be issued by the Court.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
LPA No. 115/2022
Serial No. 5
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU
CJ Court WP(C) No. 128/2022 CM Nos. 480/2022, 481/2022
Pronounced on: 02.02.2026 Uploaded on: 05.02.2026
UFLEX Ltd. Th. The Authorised Signatory Varun Kumar Sharma, Senior Manager, Lane No. 3, SIDCO Industrial Complex, Phase-1, Bari Brahmana, Samba-181133 (J&K)
…..Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s)
Through: Mr. Krati Somani, Advocate.
vs
Union of India Th. The Secretary, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, North Block, New Delhi, 110001
Union of India Th. The Secretary, Department of Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade, Ministry of Commerce and Industry, Udyog Bhawan.
Assistant Commissioner, Central GST, Division-I OB-32, Rail Head Complex, Jammu (J&K).
Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Custo
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 High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.