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
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Don't have an account? Register Here
<h1>Judicial Review Upholds Administrative Decision, Interim Relief Terminated Under Established Legal Precedent</h1> <h3>M/s. RSD Electronics Versus The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes and GST & Others</h3> HC of Orissa disposed of the writ petition following precedent in M/s. Maa Tarini Traders v. State of Odisha. The interim order was vacated. The case was ... Maintainability of petition - availability of alternative statutory remedy of Appeal - non-constitution of Appellate Tribunal - HELD THAT:- The issue is decided in the case of M/S. MAA TARINI TRADERS, M/S. SURA CONSTRUCTION, M/S. SMT. AMULU PATRO, M/S. THE NATIONAL SMALL INDUSTRIES CORPORATION LIMITED, ASHISH MOHANTY, M/S. V.S.T. TILLERS TRACTORS LIMITED, NIRANJAN PRADHAN VERSUS STATE OF ODISHA & OTHERS, JOINT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX, & ANOTHER, CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF C.T. & G.S.T., ODISHA, CENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT TAXES AND CUSTOMS (CBIC), DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, MINISTRY OF FINANCE & OTHERS, C.T. & G.S.T. OFFICER, CUTTACK-I [2024 (2) TMI 1421 - ORISSA HIGH COURT] where it was held that 'Taking into account the aforesaid Central Goods and Services Tax (Ninth Removal of Difficulties) Order, 2019 dated 03.12.2019 issued by the Government of India and subsequent clarification issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (GST Policy Wing) vide Circular No.132/2/2020 dated 18th March, 2020, it is deemed proper in the interest of justice to dispose of these writ applications subject to conditions imposed.' This writ petition stands disposed of in terms of the observation and directions issued in M/s. Maa Tarini Traders. The High Court of Orissa disposed of the writ petition based on a previous decision in the case of M/s. Maa Tarini Traders v. State of Odisha. The interim order was vacated. The matter was taken up in hybrid mode. The petitioner was represented by Mr. K.K. Sahoo, Advocate, and the opposite parties by Mr. S. Mishra, Standing Counsel for Revenue.