M.Khaja Mohideen vs. General Manager
Facts
The petitioner, M. Khaja Mohideen, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 12.06.2019 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Kakinada Central GST Division (second respondent), and a consequential order dated 18.06.2019 issued by the General Manager, Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. (first respondent). The specific tax period and the amount in dispute are not recorded in the judgment. The procedural history leading to the writ petition is not detailed, other than the issuance of the impugned orders.
Held
The Court noted that the learned counsel for the petitioner stated that the issue had become infructuous. Consequently, the Writ Petition was closed. The Court did not delve into the merits of the case or the legality of the impugned orders. No specific findings were made on any legal questions, and no ratio decidendi for future citation was established. The operative direction was to close the writ petition and connected miscellaneous petitions.
Key Issues
The Court had to decide whether the impugned orders passed by the second and first respondents were illegal. The petitioner contended that the issue had become infructuous. The respondents' contentions are not recorded in the judgment. No specific provisions of the CGST/SGST Act or Rules were explicitly discussed in relation to the arguments presented.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 10.03.2021 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN and W.M.P.(MD)Nos.10862 & 10863 of 2019 M.Khaja Mohideen ... Petitioner
-Vs- 1.General Manager, Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., Marketing Division, Southern Region, Indian Oil Bhavan, No.139, Uthamar Gandhi Salai, Chennai-600 034. 2.The Deputy Commissioner, Kakinada Central GST Division, Central Excise/Service Tax Division, No.16-23-61, GST Building, Pallam Raju Nagar, Kakinada-1, Andhra Pradesh. 3.The Additional Commissioner, Central Excise and Customs, Visakhapatnam-II, Central Excise Building, Port Area, Visakhapatnam-35, Andhra Pradesh. .. Respondents PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the second respondent in his proceedings in C.No.IV/16/14/2007-ST, dated 12.06.2019 and the consequential order of the first respondent through his proceedings in Ref.IOCL/TNSCO/2019-20/01, dated 1
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.