Himalayan Heli Service Ltd vs Union Of India And Ors on 6 May, 2025

0
89

Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Himalayan Heli Service Ltd vs Union Of India And Ors on 6 May, 2025

Author: Sindhu Sharma

Bench: Sindhu Sharma

                                                                          Sr. No. 6
       HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
                       AT JAMMU
Case: WP(C) No. 1088/2025
      CM No. 2580/2025

Himalayan Heli Service Ltd.                                          ..... Petitioner(s)

                       Through :- Mr. Vikram Sharma, Sr. Advocate with
                                  Mr. Sunil Sharma, Advocate
                                  Mr. Sachin Dev Singh, Advocate
                                  Mr. Sanpreet Singh, Advocate

                  Vs

Union of India and Ors.                                            .....Respondent(s)


                       Through :- Mr. Dheeraj Nanda, CGSC
          CORAM:
          HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SINDHU SHARMA, JUDGE
          HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SHAHZAD AZEEM, JUDGE
                                      ORDER

06.05.2025

01. Petitioner seeks quashing of notification No. 09/2023 dated 31.03.2023

and Notification No. 56/2023 dated 28.12.2023 issued by the respondents

providing for extended period of limitation being against de hors Section 168-A

of Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act, 2017. Petitioner also seeks

quashing of the order dated 01.02.2025 issued by the respondents without any

jurisdiction.

02. Learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the

issue of the extension of time limit by the impugned notice was addressed by the

Bombay High Court in Writ Petition No. 2556 of 2025 decided on 17.03.2025,

titled ‘Veritas Software Technologies India Pvt. Ltd. Versus State of

Maharashtra’ and interim relief has been granted to the petitioner therein,

therefore, the petitioner also seeks parity with the said order.

03. Mr. Dheeraj Nanda, learned CGSC appearing for the respondents

submits that the remedy available to the petitioner was to prefer an appeal,
2|Page WP(C) No. 1088/2025

which the petitioner has not chosen to file, therefore, the doctrine of election of

remedies is applicable to these proceedings. The issue raised by Mr. Nanda,

learned CGSC, can be considered only after the objections are filed.

04. List on 04.06.2025.

05. Meanwhile, subject to deposit of Rs. 02 crores by the petitioner, within a

period of two weeks, respondents shall not take any coercive action against the

petitioner. The amount so deposited shall be kept in an FDR till further orders of

this Court.

                                          ( SHAHZAD AZEEM)                (SINDHU SHARMA)
                                                JUDGE                          JUDGE

              JAMMU
              06.05.2025
              Mihul




Mihul Singh
2025.05.07 16:27
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

[ad_1]

Source link

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here