Facts of the Case
M/s. Nilachal Refractories Ltd. approached the High
Court of Orissa by filing W.P.(C) No. 22598 of 2022 against the Commissioner,
CT & GST, Odisha and another opposite party.
During consideration of the matter, the Court
permitted the petitioner to avail the statutory remedy of appeal available in
accordance with law. On that basis, the writ petition was disposed of.
The Court further addressed the question of delay
in pursuing the statutory appellate remedy. It provided that if the petitioner
filed the appeal not later than 14 November 2022, accompanied by an application
for condonation of delay citing the pendency of the writ petition and the
reason for delay, the application would be considered by the Appellate
Authority in accordance with law.
Issues
Involved
The principal issues arising from the order were:
- Whether the petitioner should be permitted to avail the statutory
remedy of appeal available under law instead of pursuing the writ
petition.
- Whether an appeal filed after delay, accompanied by an application
for condonation of delay explaining the pendency of the writ petition and
the reason for delay, should be considered by the Appellate Authority in
accordance with law.
- Whether the High Court’s disposal of the writ petition amounted to
an expression of opinion on the merits of the underlying dispute.
Petitioner’s
Arguments
The brief order does not record detailed
submissions or arguments advanced on behalf of the petitioner.
However, the order expressly reflects that the
petitioner was permitted to avail the statutory remedy of appeal in accordance
with law. It also records that, if the appeal was filed within the time
specifically indicated by the Court, the petitioner could accompany it with an
application for condonation of delay citing:
- the pendency of the writ petition; and
- the reason for delay.
No further detailed petitioner submissions are
recorded in the order.
Respondent’s
Arguments
The order does not record detailed arguments or
objections advanced on behalf of the opposite parties.
The Commissioner, CT & GST, Odisha and another
were arrayed as the opposite parties, and the CT & GST Organisation was
represented through counsel. However, no substantive respondent-side arguments
are reproduced in the order.
Court Order
/ Findings
The High Court disposed of the writ petition with
the following directions and findings:
- The petitioner was permitted to avail the statutory remedy of
appeal provided in accordance with law.
- In view of the availability and pursuit of such statutory remedy,
the writ petition was disposed of.
- If the appeal was filed not later than 14 November 2022,
accompanied by an application for condonation of delay citing the pendency
of the writ petition and the reason for delay, the same would be
considered by the Appellate Authority in accordance with law.
- The Court expressly clarified that it had not expressed any view in
the matter.
- The Court directed issuance of an urgent certified copy of the
order as per rules.
Important
Clarification
The most significant clarification in the order is
that the High Court expressly stated that it had not expressed any view in the
matter.
Accordingly, the disposal of the writ petition and
permission to avail the statutory appellate remedy should not be understood as
any adjudication, endorsement, rejection, or determination of the merits of the
underlying dispute.
Further, the Court did not itself condone the delay
through the order. It provided that if the appeal was filed by 14 November 2022
along with an application for condonation of delay citing the pendency of the
writ petition and the reason for delay, the matter would be considered by the
Appellate Authority in accordance with law.
Legal
Significance of the Order
The order highlights the importance of pursuing the
statutory appellate remedy available under law. It also demonstrates that where
a writ petition has remained pending before the High Court, such pendency may
be cited in an application seeking condonation of delay before the competent
Appellate Authority, subject to consideration in accordance with law.
At the same time, the order preserves the independence of the appellate adjudication by expressly clarifying that the High Court had not expressed any view in the matter.
Link to
Download the Order –
https://mytaxexpert.co.in/uploads/1783402728_1250compressed.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