Gillette India Limited vs Assistant Excise & Taxation ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 1172 HP

THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
                                        CWP Nos. 2254, 2255 & 2256 of
                                        2017




                                                                          .
                                            Decided on: 22.02.2021





                                CWP No. 2254 of 2017
       Gillette India Limited                                         .......Petitioner





                                            Versus
       Assistant Excise & Taxation Commissioner and others.
                                                                   ......Respondents
                                CWP No. 2255 of 2017





       Proctor & Gamble Hygiene & Healthcare                         .......Petitioner

                                            Versus

       Assistant Excise & Taxation Commissioner and others.

                                                                   ......Respondents

                                CWP No. 2256 of 2017
       Proctor & Gamble Home products                                 .......Petitioner
                                            Versus


       Assistant Excise & Taxation Commissioner and others.
                                                                   ......Respondents




       Coram





       The Hon'ble Mr. Justice L. Narayana Swamy, Chief Justice.
       The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ravi Malimath, Judge.
       Whether approved for reporting?1





       For the petitioner(s):              Mr. Juvraj Bindra, Advocate (in
                                           all the petitions).
       For the respondents:                Mr.    Ajay    Vaidya,   Senior
                                           Additional Advocate General.
                                           (Through video conferencing)
       L. Narayana Swamy, Chief Justice. (Oral)

The petitioners have filed memo for withdrawal of

these writ petitions reserving liberty to approach the Government

under the Legacy Scheme, 2019.

Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes.

2. The learned Senior Additional Advocate General

submits that withdrawal may be permitted only and in respect of

.

other submissions with regard to deposit made in compliance to

orders passed by this Court, he may not be permitted to withdraw

the said amount.

3. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner

and learned Senior Additional Advocate General for the respondent.

In the light of the submissions made, writ petitions are permitted to

be withdrawn reserving liberty to approach the Government under

the Legacy Scheme, 2019 and the deposits made in compliance to

the orders passed by this Court on 23.04.2019 are also permitted to

be withdrawn since the petitioner is withdrawing these writ

petitions.

4. With the above observations, the writ petitions are

dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. It is for the

respondent-State to proceed in accordance with law. The interim

protection given pursuant to the orders passed by this Court also

stand dissolved. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand

disposed of.

                                                ( L. Narayana Swamy )
                                                      Chief Justice


    February 22, 2021                              ( Ravi Malimath )
         (naveen)                                        Judge