M/S M. M Electrical Solutions vs. Chairman, Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And Customs, New Delhi & Ors.

Facts

The petitioners, M/s M. M Electrical Solutions, filed two writ petitions before the Delhi High Court. The respondents included the Chairman, Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC), and others, including the Government of NCT of Delhi. The core of the dispute, though not detailed in this specific order, is implied to be a GST-related matter. The parties, through their learned counsel, reached a consensus that the present writ petitions could be disposed of in terms of a previous judgment delivered by the same High Court in a different case, W.P.(C) 892/2025, titled K.S. Impex Ltd. vs. The Commissioner of Delhi Goods and Services Tax and Anr., decided on April 23, 2025. No specific tax periods, amounts in dispute, or the specific order/action under challenge are mentioned in this order.

Held

The Court held that, in view of the consensus arrived at by the learned counsel representing all the parties, the two writ petitions (W.P.(C) 15014/2026 and W.P.(C) 15072/2026) are to be disposed of in terms of the judgment passed in W.P.(C) 892/2025, K.S. Impex Ltd. vs. The Commissioner of Delhi Goods and Services Tax and Anr., decided on April 23, 2025. The reasoning is solely based on the agreement of the parties. The operative direction is that the petitions are disposed of in terms of the prior judgment. No specific findings on the merits of the GST dispute are recorded in this order, as the decision is based on the parties' consent. The specific issues decided in the K.S. Impex Ltd. case are not detailed here, but the present petitions are effectively decided based on that precedent due to the parties' agreement.

Key Issues

1. Whether the present writ petitions can be disposed of in terms of the judgment in W.P.(C) 892/2025 (K.S. Impex Ltd. vs. The Commissioner of Delhi Goods and Services Tax and Anr.) decided on 23.04.2025? (Question of law). Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner, through their counsel, agreed that the present writ petitions could be disposed of in terms of the aforesaid judgment. Revenue/State's Contention: The respondents, through their learned counsel, also agreed that the present writ petitions could be disposed of in terms of the aforesaid judgment. No specific arguments or reliance on any provisions, circulars, or precedents were recorded for either side, other than the consensus to follow the prior judgment.