Facts of the Case

M/s Sankar Prasad Jain, represented by counsel Mr. Chittaranjan Das, filed W.P.(C) No.19761 of 2023 before the High Court of Orissa at Cuttack, against the Commissioner of CT & GST, Cuttack, and other opposite parties, who appeared through Mr. Sunil Mishra, Standing Counsel for the CT & GST Organization, along with Mr. T.K. Satapathy, Senior Standing Counsel, and Mr. A. Kedia, Junior Standing Counsel. The matter was taken up through hybrid mode and heard on 01.11.2023 by a Division Bench comprising the Acting Chief Justice Dr. B.R. Sarangi and Justice Murahari Sri Raman. The order records no details of the underlying show-cause notice, assessment, or the specific amount in dispute, since the hearing proceeded directly to a request for withdrawal rather than to arguments on the merits of any assessment or demand. Counsel for the petitioner brought to the Court's notice that the GST Council was in the process of floating an amnesty scheme, which was awaiting formal notification by the Central Government, and sought permission to withdraw the writ petition so that the petitioner could instead avail the benefit of that scheme once it was notified, rather than continue to litigate the pending writ. The underlying dispute with the CT & GST Department in Cuttack thus remained unadjudicated by the Court, and the petitioner's decision to withdraw was driven purely by the anticipated availability of a more favourable, scheme-based resolution mechanism rather than by any weakness perceived in its writ case.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether the petitioner should be permitted to withdraw the writ petition in view of a forthcoming GST Council amnesty scheme.
  2. Whether liberty should be reserved to the petitioner to pursue appropriate remedies once the amnesty scheme is formally notified.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • The GST Council was floating an amnesty scheme that was awaiting notification, and the petitioner wished to avail its benefit once issued.
  • Permission was sought to withdraw the present writ petition so as to pursue the remedy that would become available under the notification.

Respondent's Arguments

  • Standing Counsel for the CT & GST Organization and senior/junior standing counsel for the second opposite party appeared before the Division Bench, but the order records no opposition whatsoever to the petitioner's withdrawal request.

Court Order/Findings

  • The Court accepted the petitioner's request without recording independent reasoning on the merits of the underlying GST dispute.
  • The writ petition was disposed of as withdrawn, with the petitioner expressly permitted to pursue its remedy before the appropriate forum in accordance with law once the anticipated amnesty scheme was formally notified by the competent authority.
  • No adjudication was made on the correctness or legality of any notice, assessment, or recovery action taken by the CT & GST Department against the petitioner.

Important Clarification

Courts routinely permit withdrawal of pending GST writ petitions, with liberty reserved, where a taxpayer wishes to instead avail a forthcoming amnesty or settlement scheme; such a disposal is procedural and does not amount to a ruling on the merits of the underlying tax dispute. Taxpayers relying on an anticipated but not-yet-notified amnesty scheme should nonetheless track the eventual notification closely, since eligibility conditions, cut-off dates, and the categories of dues covered are typically defined only once the scheme is formally issued by the GST Council and the Government.

Sections Involved

  • Odisha Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 – the composite GST framework administered by the CT & GST Department, Cuttack, under which the underlying, unspecified dispute arose.
  • Article 226 of the Constitution of India – the writ jurisdiction invoked by the petitioner and subsequently withdrawn before any adjudication.
  • GST Council amnesty/settlement notification (awaited at the time of the order) – the anticipated relief mechanism that prompted the withdrawal.

Decision – In Favour of

This is a procedural withdrawal with liberty reserved, not a merits decision. Neither the assessee nor the Department secured a substantive ruling; the petitioner elected to await the GST Council's amnesty scheme rather than continue litigating the writ petition.

Related Case Laws

No directly on-point case notes are currently published on this site.

Case Details

  • Court: High Court of Orissa at Cuttack
  • Case No.: W.P.(C) No.19761 of 2023
  • CNR: Not available on record
  • Coram: Acting Chief Justice Dr. B.R. Sarangi and Justice Murahari Sri Raman
  • Decision Date: 01 November 2023
  • Disposal Nature: Writ petition disposed of as withdrawn

Link to Download the Order

Download the full judgment (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.