Bombay High Court · 2025-04-09
A. R. SULPHONATES PRIVATE LIMITED vs UNION OF INDIA THR. THE SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE AND ORS
- Citation / case number
- WP/19366/2024
- Court
- Bombay High Court
- Petitioner
- A. R. SULPHONATES PRIVATE LIMITED
- Respondent
- UNION OF INDIA THR. THE SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE AND ORS
Judgment text excerpt
13-wp-19366-2024-judgement.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Digitally signed by SMITA SMITA RAJNIKANT RAJNIKANT JOSHI WRIT PETITION NO.19366 OF 2024 JOSHI Date: 2025.04.09 17:30:54 +0530 A. R. Sulphonates Private Limited ] a Company having its office at ] 21, Princep Street, 2nd Floor, ] Kolkata, West Bengal 700 072. ] .. Petitioner. Versus 1. Union of India ] through the Secretary, Department ] of Revenue, Ministry of Finance ] having its office at North Block, ] New Delhi 110 001. ] 2. Commissioner of Customs ] (Adjudication) Mumbai ] nd 2 Floor, Old Building, New Customs] House, Ballard Estate, ] Mumbai 400 001. ] 3. Commissioner of Customs, ] (Import-I), New Customs House, ] Ballard Estate, Mumbai 400 001. ] 4. Commissioner of Customs, ] Mundra PUB Building, Adani ] Port, Mundra, Kutch, ] Gujarat 370 421. ] 5. Commissioner of Customs, Kandla ] Customs House, Near Balaji ] Temple, Kandla 370 210. ] 6. The Deputy Commissioner of State ] Tax, KAL VAT-E-002, Bhiwandi ] rd 501, GST Bhavan, 3 Floor, Sai ] Vihar Building, Above Gurudev ] Hotel, Shivaji Path, ] Kalyan (W) 421 301. ] .. Respondents. Page 1 of 34 APRIL 09, 2025 S.R.JOSHI 13-wp-19366-2024-judgement.doc Adv. Jitendra Motwani with Ms. Rinkey Jassuja i/b. Economic Laws Practice, for the Petitioner. Adv. Ram Ochani with Adv. Niyati Mankad, for Respondent No.3. Ms. S. R. Crasto, AGP for Respondent-State. CORAM: B. P. COLABAWALLA & FIRDOSH P. POONIWALLA, JJ. RESERVED ON : MARCH 25, 2025 PRONOUNCED ON: APRIL 09, 2025 JUDGEMENT (Per FIRDOSH P. POONIWALLA,J):- 1. RULE. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally by consent of the parties. 2. The present Petition is filed challenging the Order dated 1 st August, 2024 passed by Respondent No.2 to the extent it seeks to deman