Remanded

M/S Aditi Industries v. the Union of India and 2 Ors.

Gauhati HC12 Aug 2022WP(C)/4470/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged an order confirming the demand of Central Excise Duty. The court directed the Principal Commissioner to consider the petitioner's application for a special rate and suspended the operation of the impugned order during that process.

What did the court decide?

Respondent No.2 to consider the application dated 06.06.2022 (Annexure-P) and pass a reasoned order; operation of impugned order dated 25.03.2022 suspended until exercise is completed.

M/S Aditi Industries Vs the Union of India and 2 Ors. — GST and Indirect Tax | Gauhati HC (2022)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010130972022

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/4470/2022

¶5

M/S ADITI INDUSTRIES

¶6

A PARTNERSHIP FIRM CONSTITUTED UNDER THE PROVISIONA OF THE PARTNERSHIP ACT, 1932, HAGING ITS PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS AT NH-37, HATIGAON, KALIABOR, DIST. NAGAON, PIN-782137, ASSAM, REP. BY ITS PARTNER SRI PAWAN KUMAR SINGHAL, S/O. OM PRAKASH SINGHAL, R/O. PANCHAWATI APARTMENT, H. NO. 2A, F.A. ROAD, KUMARPARA, GUWAHATI, 781001, DIST. KAMRUP (M), ASSAM.

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE UNION OF INDIA AND 2 ORS

¶9

THROUGH THE FINANCE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF FINANCE TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA, NORTH BLOCK, PARLIAMENT HOUSE, NEW DELHI110001.

¶10

2:PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICE TAX AND CENTRAL EXCISE GUWAHATI

¶11

GST BHAWAN (5TH FLOOR) KEDAR RAOD MACHKHOWA GUWAHATI-781001 PIN-781001 ASSAM.

¶12

3:ADDL. COMMISSIONER CGST GOODS AND SERVICE TAX AND CENTRAL EXCISE GUWAHATI

¶13

GST BHAWAN (5TH FLOOR) KEDAR ROAD

¶14

Page No.# 2/3

¶15

MACHKHOWA PIN-781001 ASSAM

¶16

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. D SAHU

¶17

Advocate for the Respondent : ASSTT.S.G.I.

¶18

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUMAN SHYAM

¶19

ORDER

¶20

12.08.2022

¶21

Heard Mr. D. Sahu, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. S. C. Keyal, learned Standing Counsel, GST authorities appearing for the respondents.

¶22

This writ petition has been filed inter-alia assailing the order dated 25.03.2022 passed by the Additional Commissioner, GST i.e. the respondent No.3 confirming the demand of Central Excise Duty for a sum of Rs.1,05,55,748/raised on the petitioner.

¶23

Mr. Sahu submits that after the disposal of the SLP by the Hon’ble Supreme Court by judgment and order dated 22.04.2022 the petitioner had submitted an application on 06.06.2022 seeking special rate but the said application has not been considered till today. On the other hand, an attempt is being made to recover the amount from the petitioner by adopting coercive means.

¶24

Responding to the above, Mr. Keyal, learned Standing Counsel, GST submits that although the petitioner had submitted an application seeking special rate on 06.06.2022, yet, the same was not considered since the

¶25

Page No.# 3/3

¶26

application was filed after 30^th of September of the relevant financial year. Mr. Keyal, however, submits that if this Court directs that the application dated 06.06.2022 be considered, the authorities will certainly look into the matter and pass appropriate orders therein. If that be so, I do not find any justifiable ground to keep this writ petition pending before this Court.

¶27

As agreed to by learned counsel for both the sides, this writ petition is being disposed of by providing that the respondent No.2 shall consider the application dated 06.06.2022 (Annexure-P) submitted by the petitioner and pass a reasoned order disposing of the same. Until such time the exercise, as directed by this Court, is completed, the operation of the impugned order dated 25.03.2022 shall remain suspended.

¶28

With the above observation, this writ petition stands disposed of.

¶29

JUDGE

¶30

Comparing Assistant

M/S Aditi Industries v. the Union of India and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Aditi Industries v. the Union of India and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. and 9 Ors. Vs Bineet Pandey

M/S North East Organised Floritech Private Limited and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

M/S North East Organised Floritech Private Limited and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

Khajur Begum Vs the Punjab National Bank and Anr.

Calcom Cement India Limited Vs the Union of India and 4 Ors.

Chandana Medhi Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.