Petitioner withdrew a writ petition challenging an impugned order under the GST regime. The court permitted the withdrawal while preserving the right to approach CESTAT via statutory appeal.
Writ petition dismissed on withdrawal; rights to appeal to CESTAT reserved.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATE: 07.08.2019
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.SUNDAR
W.P.No.22607 of 2019
M/s.Shriram City Union Finance Ltd., Represented by is Managing Director Mr.Yalamati Srinivas Chakrawarti
No.221, Royapettah High Road, Mylapore Chennai – 600 004 .. Petitioner Vs.
2.The Principal Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise Chennai North Commissionerate No.26/1, Mahatma Gandhi Road Chennai – 600 034 .. Respondents
Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records on the file of the 2nd respondent in passing the impugned order in C.No.V/15/130/2018-Ch.N.Adj dated 09.07.2019 and quash the same as illegal, arbitrary and devoid of merit and consequently direct the 1st respondent to consider the Rectification application field by the petitioner in the light of the circular issued by the Government vide Circular No.102/21/2016-GST dated 28.06.2019 and the Corrigendum dated 15.07.2019 to the said circular.
For Petitioner : Mr.R.Sivaraman For Respondents : Ms.Hema Muralikrishnan Standing Counsel
ORDER
After some arguments on 05.08.2019, learned counsel for writ petitioner Mr.R.Sivaraman submits that he now has instructions from the writ petitioner to withdraw the instant writ petition,
but requests that the writ petitioner's rights to avail alternate remedy by way of an appeal to the 'Central Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal' ('CESTAT' for brevity) may be preserved. Learned counsel has made an endorsement in the case file which reads as follows:
'The petitioner has instructed me to withdraw the said writ petition. Hence, may be permitted to withdraw. Sd/09.08.2019'
2.Endorsement is reiterated in the hearing today.
3.Writ petitioner is permitted to withdraw the writ petition
and rights of the writ petitioner to approach CESTAT by way of a
statutory appeal assailing the impugned order herein are
preserved. No costs. Consequently, connected WMP is closed.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS VI)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
To
1. The Principal Commissioner of CGST
Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs
GST Policy Wing, Department of Revenue
Ministry of Finance, North Block
New Delhi – 110 001
2.The Principal Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise
Chennai North Commissionerate
No.26/1, Mahatma Gandhi Road
Chennai – 600 034.
+1cc to M/s.Hema Muralikirishnan, Advocate Sr.67900
W.P.No.22607 of 2019 sv[co] srg 19/09/2019
1 provisions across 1 enactments
M/s. Shriram City Union Finance Ltd.
Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs
The Principal Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise
M. Sundar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
