Facts of the Case

The petitioner, Sabareesh Pallikere, approached the High Court of Judicature at Bombay by filing Writ Petition No. 421 of 2021 under its Civil Appellate Jurisdiction. The petition was directed against the Commissioner of Central Tax and GST Thane along with other respondents. When the matter came up for its scheduled hearing on November 18, 2022, before the division bench consisting of Hon'ble Mr. Justice K. R. Shriram and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arif S. Doctor, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, Mr. Ashwin Jain (instructed by Radha Halbe), formally sought the permission of the bench to withdraw the active writ petition. The respondents were represented during the proceeding by Senior Advocate Mr. Pradeep S. Jetly alongside Ms. Ruju Thakker.

Issues Involved

  • Whether the petitioner should be permitted to withdraw the Writ Petition filed against the GST and Central Tax authorities under the prevailing circumstances.
  • The procedural legal consequence of a formal withdrawal request made by the petitioner's counsel before a division bench of the High Court.

Petitioner’s Arguments

During the course of the hearing, the legal counsel representing Sabareesh Pallikere did not argue the core merits or the underlying tax grievances of the case. Instead, the counsel, Mr. Jain, explicitly made a strategic legal prayer seeking formal leave from the division bench to unconditionally withdraw Writ Petition No. 421 of 2021 from further judicial consideration.

Respondent’s Arguments

The respondents, comprising the Commissioner of Central Tax and GST Thane & Ors., were present through Senior Advocate Mr. Pradeep S. Jetly and Ms. Ruju Thakker. Given that the petitioner voluntarily chose to step back and requested to completely withdraw the ongoing litigation, the respondents raised no objections to the discontinuation of the proceedings.

Court Order / Findings

The Division Bench of the Bombay High Court, comprising Justice K. R. Shriram and Justice Arif S. Doctor, took the petitioner's request on record. Upon the explicit statement and application made by the petitioner's counsel seeking leave to withdraw, the Court summarily accepted the plea. Consequently, the High Court ordered that the Writ Petition be dismissed as withdrawn, effectively bringing an immediate end to the litigation before this bench without any adjudication on the merits of the underlying tax matter.

Important Clarification

This judgment highlights a foundational rule of civil and writ procedures: when a litigant voluntarily opts to withdraw their case and the court grants leave for the same, the petition is dismissed as withdrawn. Such a dismissal is procedural and does not constitute a ruling on the legal merits or statutory interpretations of the Central GST Act. It leaves the underlying issues unadjudicated by this specific order.

Sections Involved

  • Article 226 of the Constitution of India: (Implicitly governing the invocation of the Writ Jurisdiction before the High Court).
  • Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act, 2017 / Integrated Goods and Services Tax (IGST) Act, 2017: (Constituting the statutory domain of the Respondent authority, the Commissioner of Central Tax and GST Thane).

Link to download the order -https://mytaxexpert.co.in/uploads/1783313905_912compressed.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.