Facts of the Case
M/s. Shree Steels instituted W.P.(C) No. 5423 of
2022 before the High Court of Orissa at Cuttack against the Superintendent, GST
& Central Excise, Cuttack Division-II and other opposite parties. When the
matter came before the Court on 15 November 2022, learned counsel appearing for
the petitioner stated that, owing to a subsequent development, the writ
petition had been rendered infructuous. The order does not specify the nature
of the original GST or Central Excise dispute, the relief initially sought, or
the precise subsequent development that caused the writ petition to become
infructuous.
Issues
Involved
The immediate issue before the High Court was
whether the writ petition required any further adjudication after the
petitioner’s counsel stated that a subsequent development had rendered the
proceeding infructuous.
No substantive issue concerning tax liability, GST
demand, Central Excise liability, registration, input tax credit, recovery,
adjudication, refund, penalty, or any specific statutory provision was decided
in the order.
Petitioner’s
Arguments
Learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Kshirod
Kumar Sahoo, stated before the Court that due to a subsequent development, the
writ petition had been rendered infructuous.
The order records no further substantive argument
on the merits of the underlying dispute.
Respondent’s
Arguments
The order records “None” in respect of
appearance for the opposite parties. Consequently, no argument or submission on
behalf of the Superintendent, GST & Central Excise, Cuttack Division-II or
the other opposite parties is recorded in the order.
Court Order
/ Findings
The High Court took note of the statement made by
learned counsel for the petitioner that, due to a subsequent development, the
writ petition had become infructuous.
Accordingly, the Court disposed of the writ
petition as infructuous. The order does not contain any adjudication on the
merits of the underlying dispute and does not record any finding on a
substantive GST or Central Excise issue.
Important
Clarification
The order is a brief procedural disposal based upon
the petitioner’s own statement regarding a subsequent development. It should
not be interpreted as laying down a substantive proposition of law on GST,
Central Excise, tax demand, input tax credit, refund, recovery, penalty,
registration, or any other fiscal issue.
The judgment does not disclose the nature of
the subsequent development. It also does not identify or decide any
specific statutory section. Therefore, attributing a particular GST or Central
Excise controversy or statutory ruling to this order would go beyond the
judicial record.
Section
Involved
Specific statutory section: Not mentioned in the order.
Jurisdictional context: The matter was instituted as W.P.(C) No. 5423 of 2022 before the High Court of Orissa. The order itself does not expressly mention a particular constitutional Article or any section of the CGST Act, OGST Act, Central Excise Act, or allied legislation.
Link to download the order -https://www.mytaxexpert.co.in/uploads/1783313847_1003compressed.pdf
Disclaimer
This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.
0 Comments
Leave a Comment