TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Challenges to C.G.S.T. Act Section 16(2)(c) - High Court Directs Transfer</h1> <h3>M/s. LGW Industries Ltd & Ors., Raj Metal Industries & Anr., Victoria Global & Anr., Surya Alloy Industries Ltd. & Anr., M/s. Tashi Air Private Ltd. & Anr. Versus Union of India & Ors.</h3> M/s. LGW Industries Ltd & Ors., Raj Metal Industries & Anr., Victoria Global & Anr., Surya Alloy Industries Ltd. & Anr., M/s. Tashi Air Private Ltd. & ... Issues involved:Challenge to the vires of section 16(2)(c) of C.G.S.T. Act, 2017 in writ petitions listed under serial nos. 4 to 8, 12, and 19.Analysis:1. Challenge to the vires of section 16(2)(c) of C.G.S.T. Act, 2017:The writ petitions under serial nos. 4 to 8, 12, and 19 of the day's list challenged the vires of section 16(2)(c) of the C.G.S.T. Act, 2017. The submission made at the Bar was that these petitions were listed before a specific judge when the post of Additional Solicitor General was held by another judge. The petitioners in one of the writ petitions requested a direction for an affidavit, while in others, directions had already been provided. The learned advocates, including the Additional Solicitor General, expressed no objection to appearing before a regular Bench. The Court directed that the affidavits-in-opposition must be filed within four weeks, followed by replies within two weeks thereafter. It was decided that the writ petitions would be adjudicated based on the affidavits submitted.2. Listing before a regular Bench:The Court noted that the writ petitions could be conveniently heard by a regular Bench, as the Bench in question had limited time for specially assigned writ petitions. The reason for the special assignment of these cases was deemed no longer necessary. Consequently, the writ petitions were released from the current list and were directed to be listed before a regular Bench. The petitioners were granted liberty to mention the matter once the affidavits were complete for further proceedings.In conclusion, the High Court of Calcutta addressed the challenges to the vires of section 16(2)(c) of the C.G.S.T. Act, 2017 in multiple writ petitions by directing the filing of affidavits-in-opposition and subsequent replies. The Court decided to transfer the cases to a regular Bench for adjudication, considering the time constraints of the current Bench.
TaxTMI 