01Facts
The petitioners filed two writ petitions under Article 226 seeking directions for issuance of Form GST DRC-25 to reduce specified tax liabilities to nil under assessment orders.
They relied on Section 84 and Rule 161 of the applicable GST legislation and relevant circulars.
At the hearing, petitioners’ counsel sought permission to withdraw the petitions and endorsed that request in the case bundle.
pp. 3–402Issues
i.Whether the writ petitions should be dismissed as withdrawn following the petitioners’ request
p. 403Law Applied
The petitioners invoked Article 226 of the Constitution and relied on Section 84 and Rule 161 of the relevant State and Central GST legislation, together with GST circulars, as the basis for the relief sought.
pp. 3–4The Court did not examine or apply those provisions on their merits. Its order proceeded on the petitioners’ request to withdraw and granted liberty to pursue an appropriate remedy before the competent forum.
pp. 3–4Provisions in the judgment · 1 · Linked ones open on LawLens
Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 Section 84
04Reasoning
The Court recorded counsel’s request to withdraw and the corresponding endorsement in the case bundle.
p. 4Accepting that request, it did not adjudicate the petitioners’ claims for reduction of tax liability or determine the applicability of the cited GST provisions and circulars.
p. 405Holding
The Court dismissed both writ petitions as withdrawn, without costs, and granted the petitioners liberty to avail an appropriate remedy before the competent forum in accordance with law.
p. 4The connected W.M.P. was also ordered.
p. 4Original Court PDF
Sintex BAPL LimitedvsThe State of Tamil Nadu
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
