M/S Mg Oils Through Partner Mr. Sunil Bansal vs. Union Of INDIA

Held

The Court held that the orders dated 22.04.2022 and 31.05.2023 are set aside. The reasoning was based on the concession made by the respondent's counsel that the original order was passed prior to the Supreme Court's judgment in Union of India Vs. Mohit Minerals Pvt. Ltd. The Court agreed that it would be better to remand the matter to the Assessing Authority for re-examination, especially in light of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Mohit Minerals. The Court also noted that the show cause notice had been decided without the petitioner's reply. Therefore, an opportunity was granted to the petitioner to submit a reply to the show cause notice within one month. The petition was disposed of accordingly. No issue was expressly left undecided.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s MG Oils, through its partner Mr. Sunil Bansal, filed a writ petition challenging two orders: one dated 22.04.2022 (Case No.01/ADC/GST/UJN/2022-23) and another dated 31.05.2023 (Case No:IND-CGST-000-APP-03-2023-24). The respondents are the Union of India and other authorities. The High Court had previously granted interim protection to the petitioner. The respondents' counsel conceded that the order-in-original was passed before the Supreme Court's judgment in Union of India Vs. Mohit Minerals Pvt. Ltd. The petitioner did not object to remanding the matter.

Key Issues

1. Whether the orders dated 22.04.2022 and 31.05.2023 are liable to be set aside in light of the Supreme Court's judgment in Union of India Vs. Mohit Minerals Pvt. Ltd. (2022 SCC OnLine SC 657)? Petitioner's contention: The petitioner sought to challenge the impugned orders, relying on the Supreme Court's decision in Mohit Minerals and this Court's order in M/s Agarwal Fuel Corporation Private Ltd. Vs. Union of India. The petitioner sought appropriate relief, including interim protection which was granted. Revenue's contention: The respondent's counsel fairly submitted that the order-in-original was passed before the Supreme Court's judgment in Mohit Minerals. They agreed that remanding the matter to the Assessing Authority for re-examination in light of the Apex Court's judgment would be appropriate, rather than remanding it to the appellate authority.