Disposed¶21

M/S Lear Automotive India Pvt. Ltd. v. Additional Commissioner Cgst Commissionerate Dehradun

Uttarakhand HC9 Jun 2025WPMB/202/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Uttarakhand High Court, Nainital; Division Bench; neutral citation 2025:UHC:4679-DB; M/s Lear Automotive India Private Limited v. Additional Commissioner CGST; Writ Petition (M/B) No. 202 of 2025; decided 09.06.2025 by G. Narendar, C.J. (author) and Alok Mahra, J.; Section 161 Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017; Circular No. 235/29/2024-GST dated 11.10.2024; writ petition disposed with liberty to apply under Section 161 within two weeks; Adjudicating Authority to decide on merits; no costs.

What did the court decide?

Liberty reserved to the petitioner to prefer an application invoking Section 161 of the Act of 2017 within two weeks from receipt of a certified copy of the order; the Adjudicating Authority to consider and dispose of such application on merits. ¶21

M/S Lear Automotive India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Additional… — GST and Indirect Tax | Uttarakhand HC (2025)

¶1

2025:UHC:4679-DB

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

¶3

HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI G. NARENDAR AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK MAHRA

¶4

WRIT PETITION (M/B) NO. 202 OF 2025

¶5

09^TH JUNE, 2025

¶6

M/s Lear Automotive India Private Limited …… Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

Additional Commissioner CGST …… Respondent Counsel for the petitioner : Mr. Yogendra Aldak, learned counsel with Mr. Tarun Pande, learned counsel Counsel for the respondent : Mr. Shobhit Saharia, learned counsel

¶9

The Court made the following:

¶10

JUDGMENT: (per Hon’ble The Chief Justice Sri G. Narendar)

¶11

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and

¶12

the learned counsel for the respondent.

¶13

The learned counsel after arguing the matter for sometime would submit that in the instant case also he

¶14

may be permitted to avail the remedy vested in the

¶15

¶16

2025:UHC:4679-DB

¶17

assessee under Section 161 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.

¶18

It is the case of the petitioner that the Adjudicating Authority has failed to take notice and appreciate the departmental Circular bearing No. 235/29/2024-GST dated 11.10.2024, which has a direct bearing on the issue before the Adjudicating Authority.

¶19

1. The submission of the learned counsel is placed on record.

¶20

The learned counsel for the respondent would also submit that they have no objection to the petitioner availing of the remedy under Section 161 if permissible under law.

¶21

In view of the above submission, the instant writ petition stands disposed of reserving liberty to the petitioner to prefer an application invoking the provisions of Section 161 of the Act of 2017, subject to the same being invoked within two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. In the event such an application is made, the Adjudicating Authority shall consider and dispose of the same on merits.

¶22

¶23

2025:UHC:4679-DB

¶24

The above order shall not be construed as the determination of the matter on merits, and, in the event of any appeal or remedy being availed of, the same shall be considered and disposed of on the merits of the case without being influenced by any of the observations made in the instant writ petition.

¶25

1. The writ petition stands ordered accordingly.

¶26

1. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶27

As a sequel thereto, pending application, if any, shall stand closed.

¶28

________________

¶29

G. NARENDAR, C.J.

¶30

____________

¶31

ALOK MAHRA, J.

¶32

Dt: 09^TH JUNE, 2025 Negi

¶33

Digitally signed by HIMANSHU NEGI DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, HIMANS 2.5.4.20=bb3b60774012c1ef1dae20d13aaf116e73351fdaf6878326386908a7f90 d5757, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=75BD9D0FB7F4A80990F HU NEGI C51A722A6BC552D470EB4FD2F88DDF 7C18DB2A1524A4D, cn=HIMANSHU NEGI Date: 2025.06.16 10:55:28 +05'30'

¶34

M/S Lear Automotive India Pvt. Ltd. v. Additional Commissioner Cgst Commissionerate Dehradun

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Lear Automotive India Pvt. Ltd. v. Additional Commissioner Cgst Commissionerate Dehradun

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shabana Vs State of Uttarakhand

Thakur Ranveer Singh Vs State of Uttarakhand

Bobby Panwar Vs State of Uttarakhand

M/S Manish Taxi Service Derhadun Vs the Airports Authority of India

Ms Prince Pipes and Fittings Limited Vs Additonal Commissioner Cgst

Sushil Kumar Vs State of Uttarakhand