M/S Future Consumer Limited Through Authorized Signatory Mr. Rajendra Babulal Bajaj vs. The State Of Madhya Pradesh

Held

The Court held that the present writ petition should be disposed of in view of the order passed by a Coordinate Bench in the case of M/s Technosys Security System Pvt. Ltd. (supra). The Court found that the issue in the present case was similar to the one decided in the aforementioned writ petition. Consequently, the Court directed that the order passed in M/s Technosys Security System Pvt. Ltd. (W.P. No. 13618/2023) shall be applicable mutatis mutandis to the present case. This implies that the impugned order dated 11.03.2024 is set aside, and the matter is remanded back to the competent authority to decide afresh after providing the petitioner with an adequate opportunity of hearing. The ratio decidendi is that when a similar issue has been decided by a coordinate bench, the same principle should be applied to subsequent cases involving identical facts and legal questions, ensuring consistency in judicial pronouncements.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Future Consumer Limited, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 11.03.2024 passed in Case No./Reference No. SGST/2024/14/898. The petitioner argued that a similar issue had been decided by this Court in the case of M/s Technosys Security System Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner, Commercial Tax and Another (W.P. No. 13618/2023) on 05.12.2023. In that prior case, the Court had set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter back to the competent authority for a decision after providing an opportunity of hearing. The respondent was the State of Madhya Pradesh and others.

Key Issues

1. Whether the impugned order dated 11.03.2024, passed in Case No./Reference No. SGST/2024/14/898, is liable to be set aside and the matter remanded for fresh consideration, in light of the decision of this Court in M/s Technosys Security System Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner, Commercial Tax and Another (W.P. No. 13618/2023)? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner contended that the present case involves a similar issue to that decided in M/s Technosys Security System Pvt. Ltd. (supra). They relied on the order dated 05.12.2023 in W.P. No. 13618/2023, where the Court had set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter for a fresh decision after granting an opportunity of hearing. The petitioner argued that the same principle should apply here. Revenue/State's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the respondent/State.