Dismissed¶24

Vipin Sharma v. Directorate General of GST Intelligence Agra Regional Unit

Delhi HC3 Feb 2025W.P.(C)/1371/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Desealing of immovable property refused; writ petition dismissed for breach/non-compliance of undertaking given before Bombay High Court (petition earlier dismissed as withdrawn on 22 July 2024); undertaking by Directors Vipin Sharma and Arvind Kumar to appear before Directorate General of GST Intelligence, Agra Regional Unit when summoned; Delhi High Court order dated 03.02.2025; no relief granted; exemption application allowed.

What did the court decide?

Finding an abject failure on the part of the writ petitioner to comply with the undertaking given before the Bombay High Court, the Court found no justification to entertain the writ petition, which was directed to stand dismissed. ¶24

Vipin Sharma Vs Directorate General of GST Intelligence Agra Regional Unit — Delhi HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

$~78

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 1371/2025

¶4

VIPIN SHARMA .....Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. Dhruv Chaudhary, Adv.

¶6

versus

¶7

DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF GST INTELLIGENCE AGRA REGIONAL UNIT

¶8

.....Respondent Through: Mr. Harpreet Singh, SSC along with Ms. Suhani Mathur, Mr. Jai Ahuja, Advs.

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR

¶10

O R D E R % 03.02.2025

¶11

CM APPL. 6717/2025 (Ex.)

¶12

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

¶13

The application shall stand disposed of.

¶14

W.P.(C) 1371/2025

¶15

The writ petitioner has approached this Court seeking desealing of an immovable property details whereof are set forth in the writ petition.

¶16

From the disclosures which are made on the record, we find that M/s Elitecon International Ltd., a corporate entity in which the petitioner is a Director, had earlier approached the Bombay High Court by way of a writ petition which came to be disposed of on 22 July 2024 in the following terms:-

¶17

“1. After the petition was heard for some time and when the Court

¶18

This is a digitally signed order.

¶19

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 18/02/2025 at 11:13:48

¶20

expressed its view that if was not inclined to entertain the petition, Mr. Raichandani requested the matter be kept back to take instructions. Mr. Raichandani, thereafter took instructions and informed the Court that Petitioner, through its Directors Mr. Vipin Sharma and Mr. Arvind Kumar, shall attend the office of Respondent No.4 on any date and time as summoned by Respondent No.4, but only requests that he should be informed atleast 5 working days in advance so that the said Mr. Sharma and Mr. Kumar will able to collect all documents and make travel arrangements. In our view that is a reasonable suggestion. Petitioner’s undertaking, as recorded above, is accepted.

¶21

In view of the undertaking given, Mr. Raichandani seeks leave to withdraw the petition. Petition dismissed as withdrawn.

¶22

All rights and contentions of the parties are kept open.”

¶23

We are informed that there has been an abject failure on the part of the writ petitioner to comply with the undertaking which was given before the said High Court.

¶24

Consequently, and in light of the above, we find no justification to entertain the same. The writ petition shall stand dismissed.

¶25

YASHWANT VARMA, J.

¶26

HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR, J.

¶27

FEBRUARY 03, 2025/ RW

¶28

This is a digitally signed order.

¶29

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 18/02/2025 at 11:13:48

Vipin Sharma v. Directorate General of GST Intelligence Agra Regional Unit

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vipin Sharma v. Directorate General of GST Intelligence Agra Regional Unit

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sachdeva Public School Vs Directorate of Education

Dinesh Sharma Vs Ramjas School and Ors.

Union of India & Ors. Vs Suresh Kumar

Bharat Bhushan Tilwani Vs Icici Bank Ltd.

Dhunna Investment P Ltd. Vs Income Tax Officer Ward 7(1) Delhi & Ors.

Share Wise Commodity Brokers Private Limited Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 22(2) Delhi & Ors.

Dr Ramesh Kishorilal Goyal Vs Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Husky Injection Molding Systems Shanghai Ltd. and Ors. Vs Union of India & Ors.

Pr.Commissioner of Income TAX-5 Vs James Capital & Finance Pvt. Ltd.

Principal Commissioner of INCOME-TAX-7 Vs M/S Paliwal Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd.

Pr. Cit (CENTRAL)-1 Vs v.S.Chauhan

Principal Commissioner of Income TAX-12 Vs Shri Sanjay Sawhney

Kinmoi Solutions Private Limited Vs Commissioner Dsgst & Anr.

Raj Polybags Private Limited Vs Income Tax Officer Ward 21(1) & Ors.