Gauhati High Court
Having One Of Its Office At No. 36 vs The Union Of India And 2 Ors on 22 November, 2024
Author: Soumitra Saikia
Bench: Soumitra Saikia
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010243192024
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/6050/2024
MS ANABOND LTD
A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE
COMPANIES ACT, 1956 READ WITH THE COMPANIES ACT, 2013 AND
HAVING ONE OF ITS OFFICE AT NO. 36, TYPE II, DR. V. S. I. ESTATE,
THRIUVNMIYUR, CHENNAI- 600041 AND ONE OF ITS FACTORY AT PLOT
NO. I-A, BRAHMAPUTRA INDUSTRIAL PARK, SILASUNDARI, GHOPA,
KAMALPUR, KAMRUP, ASSAM- 781031, REPRESENTED THE MANAGER OF
THE PETITIONER COMPANY.
VERSUS
THE UNION OF INDIA AND 2 ORS
MINISTRY OF FINANCE, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE
MINISTRY OF FINANCE, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NEW DELHI.
2:CENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT TAXES AND CUSTOMS
1ST FLOOR
TOWER
NBCC PLAZA
SECTOR- 5
PUSHP VIHAR
NEW DELHI- 110017.
3:THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
GST AND CENTRAL EXCISE
GUWAHATI
DIVISION- I
GST BHAWAN
KEDAR ROAD
GUWAHATI- 781001
Page No.# 2/3
ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. M L GOPE, MS. N HAWELIA
Advocate for the Respondent : SC, GST, SC, FINANCE AND TAXATION
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA
ORDER
22.11.2024
Heard Ms. N. Hawelia, learned counsel for the petitioner.
By filing this writ petition the petitioner has challenged the impugned
order dated 26.04.2024 read with the rectified order dated 23.10.2024 passed
by the Assistant Commissioner, GST & Central Excise, i.e the respondent no.3.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to the judgment of the
Coordinate Bench of this Court rendered on 19.09.2024 in WP(C) No.3585/2024
to submit that the Single Bench of this Court has concluded that the show-cause
notice as well as the order passed by the GST Department has been interfered
with on the ground that they are time barred and it is submitted that facts
involved in this case are similar and covered.
Mr. B. Choudhury, learned Standing Counsel, Finance & Taxation
Department submits that the Central GST has preferred a review petition
against the said judgment. However, he is not aware as to the status or any
Page No.# 3/3
order that has been in that review petition.
Let notice be issued, returnable within 3 (three) weeks.
Mr. S.K. Medhi, learned CGC appears for the respondent no.1, Mr. S.C.
Keyal , learned Standing Counsel, CGST appears for the respondent nos. 2 & 3.
Since all the respondents are duly represented by their respective counsel,
Notices are waived. However, extra copies be furnished within 3 (three) working
days from today.
Let this matter be listed in the month of 3 rd week of January, 2025 on a
date to be fixed by Registry.
No coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner till the next date
fixed.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
