AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Heard Mr. V.Sai Amit, learned counsel representing M/s. P.V.Prasad Associates, for the petitioner; Mr. Dominic Fernandes, learned Senior Standing Counsel for Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) appearing for respondents No.1 and 2 and Mr. M.S.Achyuth Bharathwaj, learned counsel for respondent No.3.
This writ petition is filed for the following relief:
“...pleased to issue a writ, order, or direction more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus, declaring that the impugned Order-in-Original No.30 2024-25-Adjn.(GST)AC dated 13.08.2024 read with the Summary of Order in Form GST DRC-07 bearing Ref.No. ZD3608240807295 dated 21.08.2024 for FY 2019-20, passed by Respondent No.1, as being void, arbitrary, illegal, ex parte, passed in violation of the principles of natural justice, without jurisdiction and without authority of law, apart from being contrary to the retrospectively inserted Section 16(5) of the CGST Act and violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 265 of the Constitution of India, and to consequently set aside the same.”
However, after some arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks liberty to the petitioner to prefer an appeal against the impugned orders. He submits that some delay might have been occurred in preferring the appeal and therefore, the same may be directed to be considered sympathetically.
Learned Senior Standing Counsel for CBIC submits that the petitioner was at liberty to prefer an appeal against the impugned orders taking all the grounds as are available to it in law and on facts.
However, upon hearing the learned counsel for the parties, since the petitioner seeks liberty to prefer an appeal, we do not wish to comment on the merits of the contentions raised by the parties.
Accordingly, we grant liberty to the petitioner to prefer an appeal within a period of two weeks with statutory pre-deposit and a delay condonation application. The petitioner may take all such grounds in law and on facts in the memo of appeal as are available to it. Needless to say, the appellate authority would consider the question of delay taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case and if it is satisfied on the point of delay, proceed to decide the appeal on merits in accordance with law.
The Writ Petition is, accordingly, disposed of with the aforesaid liberty. There shall be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.