Nasrullah Khan vs. State Of Gujarat

Held

The Court held that the petitioner's grievance would not survive. This was based on the affidavit filed by the Assistant Commissioner, GST and Central Excise, Surat, which stated that the order-in-original dated February 28, 2014, was accepted by the department and not challenged. The affidavit further asserted that the department would not initiate or pursue any action in connection with the case against the petitioner. Since the proceedings concerning the petitioner in the Uniflex Cables Limited case were concluded, the Court found no need to further entertain the petition. For any other prayers made in the petition, the petitioner was granted liberty to approach the appropriate court, forum, or authority. The Court explicitly stated that it had not gone into the allegations made or defenses raised.

Facts

The petitioner, Nasrullah Khan, filed a petition before the Gujarat High Court seeking a direction to the respondents to refrain from issuing further summons or similar notices in connection with an inquiry related to Uniflex Cables Limited. The petitioner's grievance stemmed from ongoing proceedings. However, the Assistant Commissioner, GST and Central Excise, Surat, filed an affidavit stating that the order-in-original dated February 28, 2014, concerning Uniflex Cables Limited, was accepted by the department and not challenged. Consequently, the department asserted it would neither initiate nor pursue any action against the petitioner in this matter. The Court noted that proceedings concerning the petitioner in the Uniflex Cables Limited case had concluded.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner's grievance regarding the issuance of further summons or notices in connection with the Uniflex Cables Limited inquiry is rendered infructuous in light of the department's acceptance of the order-in-original and its assertion of not pursuing further action against the petitioner? (Question of law) The petitioner sought a directive to stop further summons. The revenue, through the affidavit of the Assistant Commissioner, GST and Central Excise, Surat, argued that since the order-in-original dated February 28, 2014, was accepted and not challenged by the department, and no further action would be pursued against the petitioner, the petition's primary prayer was no longer sustainable. The petitioner did not file any further submissions or rejoinders on this point.