Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Aban Abraham Pte Limited vs The Union Of India And Anr on 28 November, 2022

Author: Gauri Godse

Bench: Nitin Jamdar, Gauri Godse

                                                                                28-WP-4785-2022.doc


         rrpillai
                                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                     ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
                                            WRIT PETITION NO. 4785 OF 2022


                            Aban Abraham Pte Limited                         ... Petitioner
                                   vs.
                            The Union of India & Anr.                        ... Respondents

                            Mr Prakash Shah i/b. PDS Legal for the Petitioner.
                            Mr Dhananjay Deshmukh for the Respondents.

                                                              CORAM : NITIN JAMDAR AND
                                                                       GAURI GODSE, JJ.

DATE : 28 NOVEMBER 2022 P.C.:

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. According to the learned counsel for the Petitioner the impugned order has proceeded on the basis that the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s. Bhayana Builders Pvt Ltd vs. Commissioner of Service Tax Delhi 1 is not applicable in the Petitioner's case, however in series of decisions identical to the facts of the Petitioner, the tribunal has taken view that it is applicable. Learned counsel for the Petitioner states that the Petitioner has Digitally signed by RAJESHWARI applied for rectification of the impugned order dated 22 March RAJESHWARI RAMESH RAMESH PILLAI PILLAI Date:

1 2013(9) TMI 294 CESAT New Delhi (LB) 2022.12.02 1/2 16:20:39 +0530 28-WP-4785-2022.doc 2021, however the same is not being decided and therefore the present Petition is filed. The request of the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the Rectification Application be decided early is justified since it is pending for almost more than one and a half years.
4. Accordingly we defer the hearing of this Petition to 20 February 2023. We expect that by next date Authority would have decided the Rectification Application.

(GAURI GODSE, J.) (NITIN JAMDAR, J.) 2/2