2025 (5) TMI 1980

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....isted by Shri Vishal Lashkari, learned counsel for the petitioners in all the writ petitions Shri Prasanna Prasad, learned counsel for the respondents ORDER Per : Justice Vivek Rusia Since the subject matter of these writ petitions is identical in nature, with the joint request of the parties, they are analogously heard and being decided by this common order. For the sake of convenience, facts of Writ Petition No.15428 of 2025 are being taken into consideration as under:- 01. The petitioner has filed the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the order date 19.12.2024, i.e. an order in original passed by the Additional Commissioner, office of Principal Commissioner of Central Goods & Service Tax a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....lied on and did not consider the submissions and grounds raised by the petitioner. Learned Counsel further submits that respondent No.3 erred in issuing the common notice dated 02.08.2024 for different financial years. In support of the aforesaid contention, learned Counsel has placed upon several judgment delivered in the cases of Bharat Mint & Allied Chemicals v/s Commissioner of Commercial Tax reported in 2022 (59) G.S.T.L. 394 (All.), Andaman Timber Industries v/s Commissioner of Central Excise, Kolkata-II reported in 2015 (324) E.L.T. 641 (S.C.), Century Textile & Ind. Limited v/s Union of India reported in 2008 (232) E.L.T. 389 (Bom.), Nishad K.U. V/s The Joint Commissioner, Central Tax and Central Excise, CGST, Kochi & Others (WP (C)....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of Shrigovind Niranjan & Others v/s The State of Madhya Pradesh & Others Neutral Citation - 2024: MPHC - JBP:56995 (Writ Appeal No.2228 of 2023). 06. We have heard learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the record. 07. So far as the territorial jurisdiction is concerned, this issue is no more res integra. The Division Bench of this Court in the case of Shrigovind Niranjan (supra) has held that the expression 'cause of action' used in Clause (2) of Article 226 of the Constitution of India indisputably even if the small fraction thereof accrues within the jurisdiction of the Court, the Court will have jurisdiction in the matter through the doctrine of forum conveniens may also have to be considered. 08. In the prese....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hority after examining the record and the relevancy of the deposition of the witnesses. The appellate authority would be competent to decide all the issues and grounds raised in the writ petition. There should not be an avoidance of pre-deposit condition for the entertainment of a statutory appeal. 11. The Apex Court in the case of Greatship (India) Limited (supra) has held that the High Court has seriously erred in entertaining the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India against the assessment order and ought to have relegated the writ petitioner to avail the statutory remedy of appeal. Paragraphs 14 to 17 of the aforesaid judgment are reproduced below:- ''14. Applying the law laid down by this Court in the ....