Disposed
PrafHul N. Vaghani v. the State of Maharashtra and 2 Ors.
Bombay HCWP/2172/2022
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
2172-22.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF
What the court decided
AI extract
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Digitally signed by MUGDHA M MUGDHA M PARANJAPE PARANJAPE Date: 2022.11.16 14:37:04 +0530
1 408-WP 2172-22.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.2172 OF 2022
PrafHul N. Vaghani… Petitioner
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra & Ors.… Respondents
Mr. Manan Jaiswal a/w Mr. Aditya Manjrekar and Ms. Niyati Shah i/by
MLS Vani & Associates for Petitioner.
Mr. Himanshu B. Takke, AGP for Respondents.
P.C.:
1.Mr. Jaiswal states that Petitioner’s case is covered by a
judgment of this Court dated 22nd August 2022 in Writ Petition (L)
No.2121 of 2022 and other Petitions and, therefore, reliefs in terms of
prayer clauses (a) and (b) be granted. Mr. Takke also agrees.
2. Consequently, Petition disposed in terms of prayer clauses (a)
and (b), which reads as under :-
“(a) that this Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or a writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other writ, order or direction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India declaring that the sales tax dues of M/s. Twin City Organics Pvt. Ltd. cannot be recovered from its director, namely the Petitioner;1 of 2
Mugdha
2 408-WP 2172-22.doc
(b) that this Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue a Writ of Certiorari or a writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other writ, order or direction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India calling for the records pertaining to : i) the impugned Order dated 27.09.2021 passed by the Respondent No.3; ii) the consequential Notice of Demand dated 27.09.2021 issued under Section 38 of the BST Act; and iii) the consequential Final Notice of Assessment dated 27.09.2021 in Form VIII(B) under the CST Act (Exhibit “A”) and to quash and set aside the same after going into the validity and legality thereof;”3. No order as to costs.
(ARIF S. DOCTOR, J.)
( K.R. SHRIRAM, J.)
2 of 2
Mugdha
PrafHul N. Vaghani
The State of Maharashtra
ARIF S. DOCTOR
K.R. SHRIRAM
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court