Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Delhi High Court - Orders

M/S. Opes Chem Corp Pvt. Ltd vs Union Of India & Ors on 20 September, 2022

Author: Rajiv Shakdher

Bench: Rajiv Shakdher

                              $~37
                              *    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                              +      W.P.(C) 1142/2021

                                     M/S. OPES CHEM CORP PVT. LTD                     ......Petitioner
                                                   Through: Ms Anjali Jha Manish and Mr
                                                            Priyadarshi Manish, Advocates.
                                                   versus
                                     UNION OF INDIA & ORS.                       ......Respondents
                                                           Through:       Ms Kunjala Bhardwaj, Adv. for Mr
                                                                          Kirtiman Singh, CGSC for R-1/UOI.
                                                                          Mr Harpreet Singh, Senior Standing
                                                                          Counsel along with Mr Arunesh
                                                                          Sharma and Mr Jatin Kumar Gaur,
                                                                          Advocates for R-3.
                                     CORAM:
                                     HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER
                                     HON'BLE MS JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU
                                                  ORDER

% 20.09.2022 [Physical Court hearing/ Hybrid hearing (as per request)] CM APPL 41570/2022

1. This is an application filed on behalf of respondent no. 3, seeking waiver of costs of Rs.5,000/- imposed by this Court via order dated 22.08.2022.

2. Mr Harpreet Singh, who appears on behalf of respondent no. 3, points out that there was a change in counsel.

3. We are informed, that the earlier counsel engaged inter alia on behalf of respondent no. 3, was Ms Sonu Bhatnagar.

4. Our attention has been drawn to the order dated 29.07.2021.

4.1 On the said date, Ms Sonu Bhatnagar had indicated to the Court, that a counter-affidavit, on behalf of respondent no. 3, had been filed on 27.07.2021.

5. This position appears to be correct, as per the status of the case, shown on the High Court Website.

6. We may also note, that a "short affidavit" filed on behalf of respondent no. 3, is on record.

7. It appears, that thereafter Mr Harpreet Singh was assigned the case, not only on behalf of respondent no. 3, but on behalf of respondent nos. 2, 4 and 5 as well.

8. Mr Harpreet Singh says, that because of lack of communication, he was unaware of the fact that Ms Bhatnagar has already filed a counter- affidavit on behalf of respondent no. 3, and therefore, time was sought on various dates, to file a counter-affidavit in the matter. 8.1 This is evident from a perusal of order dated 10.02.2022 and 25.04.2022.

8.2 It is in these circumstances, that costs of Rs.5,000/- were imposed on respondent nos. 2 & 3, to be paid jointly and/or severally.

9. While Ms Anjali Jha Manish, who appears on behalf of the petitioner, does not dispute that the counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent no. 3, she contends that no counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of the remaining respondents.

9.1 That position appears to be correct.

10. Ms Kunjala Bhardwaj, who appears on behalf of respondent no. 1, says that she does not wish to file a counter-affidavit in the matter.

11. We may note, as was recorded on 22.08.2022, that the contesting respondents in the matter are respondents no. 2 & 3. 11.1 Mr Harpreet Singh also affirms this position.

12. Given the aforesaid circumstances, the direction contained in the order dated 22.08.2022, to the extent it imposed the costs of Rs.5,000/- on respondent nos. 2 & 3 is recalled.

12.1 However, it is made clear, that no request from the remaining respondents will now be entertained, concerning any plea put forth for filing counter-affidavits in the matter.

13. It is important to note, that in the main writ petition, inter alia challenge has been laid to circular dated 17.06.2019 issued by the Central Board of Indirect Tax and Customs (CBIC).

13.1 Mr Harpreet Singh says that challenge to the very same circular has been raised, amongst others, in W.P. (C) 5557/21, titled Aakriti International vs. Union of India and Ors.

14. We are informed that the said writ petition is listed before the Court on 12.01.2023.

14.1 We are also informed by Mr Singh, that pleadings in that writ petition are complete.

15. It appears, that some of the respondents may, perhaps, rely upon the counter-affidavit filed in that matter.

16. Given this position, the above-captioned application is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

W.P.(C) 1142/2021

17. Ms Manish will have the liberty to file a rejoinder to the short affidavit filed on behalf of respondent no. 3. 17.1 The rejoinder will be filed within the next two weeks.

18. List the matter on the date already fixed i.e., on 22.11.2022.

RAJIV SHAKDHER, J TARA VITASTA GANJU, J SEPTEMBER 20, 2022/sk Click here to check corrigendum, if any W.P.(C) 1142/2021 4/4 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:KAUSHAL KUMAR SACHDEVA Signing Date:09.10.2022 13:46:21