Sh Ishwar Chand v. Union of India

Delhi High Court · 27 Apr 2022 · 2022:DHC:1693-DB
Rajiv Shakdher; Manoj Kumar Ohri
W.P.(C) 6680/2022
2022:DHC:1693-DB
administrative appeal_allowed

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court restored the petitioner’s GSTIN number and granted three months to file GST returns, disposing of the writ petition without adjudicating the claim for damages.

Full Text
Translation output
W.P.(C)6680/2022
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: 27.04.2022
W.P.(C) 6680/2022
SH ISHWAR CHAND PROP. OF ......Petitioner
Through: Mr Malay Swapnil with Ms Bhumika Aggarwal and Ms Shreenidhi, Advocates.
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ......Respondents
Through: Mr Krishna K.Sharma with Mr Anil Devlal, Advocates for respondent no.1/UOI.
Mr Vijay Joshi, Sr Standing Counsel for respondents no.2 and 3/CBI
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER
HON’BLE MR JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR OHRI
[Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)]
RAJIV SHAKDHER, J. (ORAL):-
CM APPL. 20281/2022
JUDGMENT

1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions. W.P.(C) 6680/2022

2. Issue notice to the respondents.

3. Mr Krishna K. Sharma accepts notice on behalf of the respondent no.1/Union of India (UOI). Likewise, Mr Vijay Joshi accepts notice on behalf of respondent nos.[2] and 3.

4. With the consent of the counsel for the parties, the writ petition is taken up for hearing and final disposal, at this stage itself. 2022:DHC:1693-DB

5. The substantive prayers made in the writ petition are as follows:

“1. Issuance of a Writ of Mandamus or any other Appropriate Writ whereby directing the Respondents to restore the “GSTIN 07ABSPC2338JIZJ” in the name of Sh. Ishwar Chand Proprietor of M/S Bhagwati Trading Company, 656-A, Chandni Chowk, Katra Hira Lal, Delhi- 110006. 2. To direct the respondents to compensate for loss of business and reputation and be held liable to pay the petitioner for damages and compensation amounting to the tune of Rupees Six Lakhs Only.”

6. Mr Malay Swapnil, who appears on behalf of the petitioner, at the very outset, says that he does not wish to press the prayer made in the writ petition for damages, and that, if so advised, the petitioner will take recourse to an appropriate remedy, albeit as per law, with regard to the prayer made for damages.

7. Insofar as the relief sought in prayer clause (1) is concerned, we are informed by the counsel for the respondents that the petitioner’s grievance has been addressed. 7.[1] In other words, the petitioner’s GSTIN number has been restored. 7.[2] Counsel for the petitioner affirms this position.

8. We have put to the counsel for the respondents, as to whether some leeway should be granted to the petitioner to file its return. 8.[1] Counsel for the respondents says that a reasonable period could be accorded for this purpose. 8.[2] Accordingly, the petitioner is granted three months to upload the return on the web-portal. The said period will commence from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

9. The writ petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

RAJIV SHAKDHER, J MANOJ KUMAR OHRI, J APRIL 27, 2022 / tr Click here to check corrigendum, if any