Celine Health Care PVT. LTD. vs. State Th. Finance Deptt.And Ors.

Held

The Court held that the petitioner's grievance stood redressed. This was based on the submission by the learned Advocate General for the State, supported by a communication dated 21.11.2022 from the Dy. Excise Commissioner (Distilleries) Jammu, stating that the refund of unutilized duty deposited in Excise Head-0039 prior to the implementation of GST had already been disbursed to the petitioner-Company. Consequently, the Court found that nothing further survived for consideration in the petition. The ratio decidendi is that once the revenue demonstrates that the refund sought by the petitioner has already been disbursed, the writ petition becomes infructuous. The operative direction was to dismiss the petition.

Facts

The petitioner, Celine Health Care Pvt. Ltd., filed a writ petition seeking a direction for the immediate release of Rs. 5,73,171.96 deposited by it as advance excise duty. The State, through the learned Advocate General, submitted that the refund of unutilized duty deposited in Excise Head-0039 prior to the implementation of GST had already been disbursed to the petitioner. A communication dated 21.11.2022 from the Dy. Excise Commissioner (Distilleries) Jammu was produced on record to substantiate this claim. The Court noted that the petitioner's grievance had been redressed.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner's grievance regarding the release of advance excise duty stands redressed? The petitioner argued that they were seeking a direction for the immediate release of Rs. 5,73,171.96 deposited as advance excise duty. The State contended that the refund of unutilized duty deposited in Excise Head-0039 before the implementation of GST had already been disbursed to the petitioner, supported by a communication from the Dy. Excise Commissioner (Distilleries) Jammu. The State's argument was that the issue was resolved, and no further action was required from the Court.