Appeals Dismissed for Lack of Maintainability After Withdrawal without Reserving Liberty

The appeals challenging an order were dismissed as withdrawn, raising questions on their maintainability. The appellant sought to demonstrate goods movement pre-order. The respondent argued citing legal precedent that without liberty to file a fresh appeal, the present appeals are not maintainable. The Supreme Court highlighted preclusion from challenging an order if a special leave petition is withdrawn without reserving liberty to file afresh. Legal precedents emphasized that appeals under Article 136 are not maintainable against an order rejecting review. The court dismissed the appeals, stating that repeated appeals against the same order are impermissible once the remedy is exhausted by withdrawing the appeal without reserving liberty.

---

---

Issues involved:
The appellant's appeal impugning an order dated 01.10.2021 in Appeal No. 162-165/ATVAT/2019 and Appeal No. 166-169/ATVAT/2019 was dismissed as withdrawn, leading to the question of maintainability of the present appeals.

Impugned Order Withdrawn:
The appellant withdrew the appeal after some arguments, seeking liberty to demonstrate the movement of goods had taken place before the concerned authority u/s Section 3(1)(a) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956.

Maintainability Challenge:
The respondent argued against the maintainability of the present appeal, citing the Supreme Court's decision in Vinod Kapoor vs. State of Goa & Ors., emphasizing that without liberty to file a fresh appeal, the present appeals are not maintainable.

Preclusion from Challenging Order:
The Supreme Court's decision highlighted that once a special leave petition is withdrawn without reserving liberty to file afresh, the appellant is precluded from challenging the order through a special leave to appeal under Article 136 of the Constitution.

Legal Precedents:
The court referred to previous cases to support the principle that an appeal by way of Special Leave Petition under Article 136 of the Constitution is not maintainable against an order rejecting an application for review, as per Order XLVII, Rule 7 of the Civil Procedure Code.

Dismissal of Appeals:
Based on established legal principles, the court dismissed the present appeals as not maintainable, emphasizing that the litigant cannot file repeated appeals against the same order once the remedy has been exhausted by withdrawing the appeal without reserving the liberty to file afresh.

---