Indcop Industries Private Limited Vs State of Punjab and Others

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

¶3

126 CWP-6087-2026 (O&M) Date of Decision:08.07.2026

¶4

INDCOP INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED ....PETITIONER(S)

¶5

VERSUS

¶6

STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS ….RESPONDENT(S) 138 CWP-11785-2026 (O&M)

¶7

STATE OF PUNJAB ....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS M/S INDCOP INDUSTRIES AND ANR ….RESPONDENT(S) 139 CWP-11813-2026 (O&M) STATE OF PUNJAB ....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS M/S INDCOP INDUSTRIES AND ANR ….RESPONDENT(S)

¶8

162 CWP-16782-2026 (O&M)

¶9

STATE OF PUNJAB ....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS M/S INDCOP INDUSTRIES AND ANR ….RESPONDENT(S)

¶10

CORAM:HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHIT KAPOOR

¶11

Present: Mr. Sudhir Malhotra, Advocate for the petitioner in CWP-6087-2026 and for the respondents in CWP-11785-2026, CWP-11813-2026 and CWP-16782-2026.

¶12

Mr. Saurabh Kapoor, Addl., AG, Punjab for the petitioner in CWP-11785-2026, CWP-11813-2026 and CWP-16782-2026 and for the respondents in CWP6087-2026.

¶13

¶14

ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA, A.C.J. (Oral)

¶15

Since all these writ petitions arise from the same lis and

¶16

revolve around substantially similar questions of fact and law, they are

¶17

RAHUL JOSHI 2026.07.10 16:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab & Haryana High Court, CHD

¶18

CWP-6087-2026 (O&M) and other connected cases

¶19

2

¶20

being disposed of through this common judgment. For convenience, and with the consent of the parties, CWP-6087-2026 shall serve as the lead case, and the decision herein shall apply to the other writ petitions.

¶21

Petitioner, in the present petition, has prayed for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to release goods in view of orders dated 04.04.2025 (Annexure P-3), 04.04.2025 (Annexure P-4) and 18.07.2025 (Annexure P-8) passed by the Deputy Commissioner State Tax (Appeals), Patiala, Punjab in favour of the petitioner.

¶22

It is submitted that the order passed by the Appellate Authority has not been interfered with by any higher forum and, therefore, the respondents cannot withhold the release of the goods pursuant to the said order, which, as of now, has not been interfered with. 4. We may observe that the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner, State Tax (Appeals), Patiala, Punjab, the enforcement of which is being sought by the petitioner, is under challenge before us in connected petitions filed by the State of Punjab. The legality of the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner, State Tax (Appeals), Patiala, Punjab, is, therefore, sub judice before this Court. We may also observe that, ordinarily, the order of the First Appellate Authority would be subject to a second appeal under Section 112 of the Central Goods and Services Act, 2017 (for short, ‘ the Act ’), but such an appeal was not filed, and writ petitions were directly entertained since the Tribunal, which was to decide appeals under Section 112 of the Act, had itself not been constituted.

¶23

RAHUL JOSHI 2026.07.10 16:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab & Haryana High Court, CHD

¶24

CWP-6087-2026 (O&M) and other connected cases

¶25

3

¶26

During the pendency of the writ petition(s), the Tribunal has now been constituted but is not yet fully functional.

¶27

We are of the view that, once the State has the statutory alternative remedy available of challenging the order of the Deputy Commissioner, State Tax (Appeals), Patiala, Punjab, wherein questions of fact and law can be gone into, it would not be proper for us to exercise our extraordinary jurisdiction, at the first instance, to examine the legality of such claim. We are of the view that the State would be well advised to institute an appropriate appeal in terms of Section 112 of the Act and pursue it before the competent forum.

¶28

As of now, there has been no interference by any higher forum with the order passed by the First Appellate Authority. In the writ petitions filed by the State of Punjab also, no interim protection has been granted. Merely because the State proposes to challenge the order in appropriate proceedings, it would not be proper for the State to withhold compliance with the order passed by the First Appellate Authority, particularly when the petitioner is a company engaged in manufacturing and is not a fly-by-night operator. In the event the State succeeds in getting the order of the First Appellate Authority reversed, it shall be open to the State to proceed with such consequential action as may be admissible in accordance with law.

¶29

Merely for such reason, compliance with the order passed by the First Appellate Authority cannot be withheld. This is particularly so as, under the order of the First Appellate Authority, directions have been

¶30

RAHUL JOSHI 2026.07.10 16:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab & Haryana High Court, CHD

¶31

CWP-6087-2026 (O&M) and other connected cases

¶32

4

¶33

issued for the release of copper scrap, which, according to the petitionercompany, was being transported from Delhi to Jammu and was not meant for consumption within the State of Punjab. We need not advert to these aspects of the matter, as the findings returned by the First Appellate Authority shall remain subject to the orders to be passed by the appropriate appellate forum.

¶34

In order to adjust the equities, we direct that the petitionercompany shall furnish a bond along with a local surety to the satisfaction of the Assessing Authority so that in the event of the State succeeding in

¶35

the appeal, the recoveries may be made from the petitioner/surety.

¶36