Tvl.Mh87 Sithayankottai Hwcps LTD vs. The Commissioner Of Central GST And Excise
Facts
The petitioner, Tvl.MH87 SITHYANKOTTAI HWCPS LIMITED, filed a writ petition before the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court challenging an order dated 02.01.2020, which appears to be an impugned order related to the cancellation of their GSTIN (33AADAM1056G2ZZ). The petitioner sought to quash this order and consequently direct the respondents (Commissioner, Assistant Commissioner, and Superintendent of Central GST and Excise) to revoke the cancellation of their GST registration. The writ petition was filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The respondents are the Commissioner of Central GST and Excise, Madurai, the Assistant Commissioner of Central GST and Excise, Dindigul, and the Superintendent, Dindigul (Rural).
Held
The Court noted the submission made by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner wished to prefer an appeal against the impugned order. Recording this submission, the Court dismissed the writ petition as withdrawn. The dismissal was granted with a liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal against the impugned order before the appropriate appellate authority. No order as to costs was made. The Court did not decide on the merits of the cancellation of the GSTIN or the validity of the impugned order.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to have the impugned order dated 02.01.2020 quashed and the cancellation of their GSTIN revoked, as a matter of law or mixed law and fact, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner's counsel, on instructions, submitted that the petitioner intended to prefer an appeal against the impugned order. Therefore, the petitioner sought to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to file an appeal before the appropriate appellate authority. The respondents did not record any specific arguments in the judgment.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 03.09.2021 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SURESH KUMAR Tvl.MH87 SITHYANKOTTAI HWCPS LIMITED, Represented by its Manager, S.Chinnadurai, aged about 59 years, S/o. Subramani, Sithayankottai, Kannivadi Sami Mada Street, Sithayankottai Post, Dindigul District – 624 708. ... Petitioner Vs. 1.The Commissioner of Central GST and Excise, O/o. The Commissioner of Central GST and Excise, Central Revenue Building, Bibikulam, Madurai – 625 002. 2.The Assistant Commissioner of Central GST and Excise, Dindigul – II Division, O/o. The Assistant Commissioner of Central GST and Excise, Balakrishnapuram Pudur, Dindigul – 624 005. 3.The Superintendent, Dindigul (Rural), Batlagundu Range, Dindigul – II Range Office, Balakrishnapuram Pudur, Dindigul – 624 005. ... Respondents P RAYER:
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order of the third respondent in Reference No.ZA330120
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 Madras High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.