Binding precedent controls challenge to impugned order, leading to quashing in line with Supreme Court guidance.

Where the controversy was covered by the Supreme Court's decision in M/s VVF Limited and both sides accepted that position, the Gauhati HC held that the impugned order could not be sustained. The writ petition was disposed of by applying the controlling precedent, the order dated 22.06.2017 was set aside and quashed, and the respondents were left free to proceed in accordance with law in terms of that decision.

---

---

Issues: Whether the impugned order dated 22.06.2017 was liable to be set aside and quashed in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in M/s VVF Limited.

Analysis: The petitioners accepted the stand taken by the GST Department that the controversy was covered by the decision of the Supreme Court in M/s VVF Limited. In view of the concession by both sides, the writ petition was disposed of in accordance with that decision and the impugned order was not sustained.

Conclusion: The impugned order was set aside and quashed, and the respondents were left at liberty to proceed in accordance with law in terms of the Supreme Court decision.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition succeeded to the extent of quashing the impugned order and the matter was disposed of by applying the controlling precedent.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the controversy is covered by a binding precedent accepted by both sides, the impugned order cannot be sustained and may be quashed in conformity with that precedent.

---