Hoping Kurbah vs. The Commissioner Central Goods And Services Tax And 4 Ors.

Held

The Court permitted the petitioner to withdraw the writ application. The reasoning was based on the petitioner's request to approach the Appellate Tribunal, as provided for under Section 112(b) of the CGST Act. This section allows for appeals against orders passed in appeal. The Court found this to be a valid procedural recourse for the petitioner. The ratio decidendi is that a party may be permitted to withdraw a writ petition to pursue a statutory remedy available to them, especially when such a remedy is explicitly provided by law. The operative direction was to allow the withdrawal and close the matter accordingly. No issues were expressly left undecided.

Facts

The petitioner, Shri. Hoping Kurbah, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Meghalaya. The respondents were various authorities under the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act, including the Commissioner, Additional Commissioner (Appeals), and Superintendents. The writ petition was filed challenging an order or action passed by one of these authorities. The specific tax period(s) and the amount in dispute were not recorded in the judgment. The procedural history indicates that the matter was listed before a Division Bench of the High Court.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner is permitted to withdraw the writ application with liberty to approach the Appellate Tribunal, as provided under Section 112(b) of the CGST Act, against an order in appeal. Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner, through their counsel, prayed to withdraw the writ application. They sought permission to approach the Appellate Tribunal, citing Section 112(b) of the CGST Act, which allows appeals to the Appellate Tribunal against an order in appeal. Revenue's Argument: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the respondents (revenue). However, they were present and accepted notice.