Facts of the Case

M/S Shiv Shakti Transport, a partnership firm based in North Bongaigaon, Assam, filed Writ Petition (C) No. 1753/2023 before the Gauhati High Court against the Union of India and three GST authorities — the Principal Commissioner of Central Goods and Service Tax, Guwahati, the Assistant Commissioner, CGST, Dhubri Zone, and the Superintendent, CGST, Bongaigaon-I. The petition papers do not spell out the specific GST demand or action being challenged, as the matter was disposed of at a very early, threshold stage.

When the case came up before Hon'ble Mr. Justice Suman Shyam on 22.09.2023, counsel for the petitioner informed the Court that, during the pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner's grievance had already been redressed by the GST authorities. He accordingly sought to withdraw the petition. Counsel for the respondents did not object.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether the writ petitioner should be permitted to withdraw the petition on the ground that its underlying grievance against the GST authorities had already been resolved.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • The petitioner submitted, through counsel, that its grievance had been redressed during the pendency of the case and that it therefore wished to withdraw the writ petition.

Respondent's Arguments

  • The respondent GST authorities did not oppose the prayer for withdrawal.

Court Order / Findings

  • The Court recorded the submission that the grievance stood redressed and the withdrawal was unopposed.
  • The writ petition was disposed of as withdrawn.
  • No findings were recorded on the merits of whatever GST action or demand had originally prompted the petition.

Important Clarification

Because the case was withdrawn as soon as the petitioner's grievance was resolved, this order does not lay down any principle of GST law. It simply confirms that where a tax dispute gets resolved administratively while litigation is pending, a petitioner can walk away from the writ without needing a decision on merits — useful only as a reminder that administrative resolution can moot litigation, not as precedent on any substantive GST question.

Sections Involved

  • Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (respondents were CGST authorities; no specific provision was adjudicated)

Decision – In Favour of

Disposed of on withdrawal, at the petitioner's own request, with no decision on merits. Neither side can be said to have "won" on any substantive point of GST law.

Case Details

  • Court: Gauhati High Court (High Court of Assam, Nagaland, Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh)
  • Case No.: WP(C)/1753/2023
  • CNR: GAHC010065972023
  • Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Suman Shyam
  • Date of Order: 22-09-2023

Link to Download the Order

Click here to view/download the full order

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.