Facts of the Case

Hitu Pradhan filed W.P.(C) No. 9323 of 2022 before the High Court of Orissa at Cuttack against the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes & GST, Odisha and other opposite parties.

The matter came before the Division Bench comprising the Hon’ble Chief Justice Dr. S. Muralidhar and Hon’ble Mr. Justice M. S. Raman on 03.11.2022.

On the date of the order, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner filed a memo before the Court.

Through that memo, the petitioner sought leave to withdraw the writ petition.

The High Court directed that the memo filed by the petitioner’s counsel be kept on record.

Consequently, the Court disposed of the writ petition as withdrawn.

Issues Involved

In view of the extremely limited nature of the order, the operative issue before the Court at this stage was:

  1. Whether the petitioner should be permitted to withdraw W.P.(C) No. 9323 of 2022 pursuant to the memo filed before the Court.

The uploaded order does not disclose or adjudicate the underlying substantive GST dispute.

Therefore, it would not be accurate to formulate additional issues concerning:

  • GST demand;
  • Input tax credit;
  • Registration cancellation;
  • Refund;
  • Detention of goods;
  • E-way bill;
  • Assessment;
  • Penalty;
  • Recovery;
  • Adjudication proceedings; or
  • Any particular provision of the CGST/OGST enactments.

No such substantive issue is identified or decided in the uploaded order.

Petitioner’s Arguments

The order records only one material submission/action on behalf of the petitioner.

Learned counsel for the petitioner filed a memo before the Court seeking leave to withdraw the writ petition.

No detailed arguments on the merits of the underlying dispute are recorded in the order.

Accordingly, the petitioner’s position, as expressly reflected in the order, was confined to the request that permission be granted to withdraw the writ petition.

Respondents’ Arguments

The opposite parties included the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes & GST, Odisha and others.

The order records the appearance of Mr. Susanta Kumar Pradhan, ASC for GST.

However, the order does not record any detailed arguments, objections or submissions advanced by the opposite parties concerning the petitioner’s request for withdrawal.

Therefore, no respondent argument should be inferred or attributed beyond the express contents of the order.

Court’s Findings

The High Court took note of the memo filed in Court by learned counsel for the petitioner seeking leave to withdraw the writ petition.

The Court directed that the memo be kept on record.

Following the petitioner’s request for withdrawal, the High Court disposed of the writ petition as withdrawn.

The Court did not enter into the merits of the underlying GST dispute.

The Court did not record any substantive finding on the legality or validity of any GST action.

The Court also did not determine any question concerning liability, tax, interest, penalty, input tax credit, refund, registration, assessment or recovery.

Court Order

The High Court of Orissa passed the following order:

  1. Learned counsel for the petitioner filed a memo in Court seeking leave to withdraw the writ petition.
  2. The Court directed that the memo be kept on record.
  3. The writ petition was accordingly disposed of as withdrawn.

Important Clarification

This order is a withdrawal order and not a judgment deciding the substantive GST controversy on merits.

The High Court did not:

  • Allow the writ petition on merits;
  • Dismiss the writ petition on merits;
  • Decide any question of GST liability;
  • Interpret any specific provision of the CGST Act or OGST Act;
  • Quash any GST demand or proceeding in the text of this order;
  • Uphold any GST demand or proceeding in the text of this order;
  • Grant any substantive declaration concerning input tax credit;
  • Decide any issue of refund;
  • Decide any issue of registration;
  • Decide any issue of detention or confiscation;
  • Record findings concerning penalty or recovery; or
  • Lay down any substantive ratio on GST law.

The only operative consequence recorded in the order is that the writ petition was disposed of as withdrawn pursuant to the memo filed by learned counsel for the petitioner.

It is also important that the order does not expressly record any liberty to file a fresh petition or pursue another remedy. Therefore, such liberty should not be assumed or added while reporting the decision.

Link to download the order -

https://www.mytaxexpert.co.in/uploads/1783408804_1199compressed.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.