Gauhati High Court
WA/37/2025 of The Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs and 3 Ors Vs Mahabir Tiwari on 22 February 2026
GAHC040013362025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH) Case No. : WA/37/2025 The Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs and 3 Ors represented by its Chairman, 1st Floor Tower NBCC, Plaza-1, Sector-5, Pushp Vihar, New Delhi
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
GAHC040013362025
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH) Case No. : WA/37/2025 The Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs and 3 Ors represented by its Chairman, 1st Floor Tower NBCC, Plaza-1, Sector-5, Pushp Vihar, New Delhi 110017 2: The Goods and Service Tax Council Age: Occupation : represented by its Chairperson 5th Floor Tower-II Jeevan Bharati Building Janapath Road Connaught Place New Delhi 110001 3: The Commissioner Age: Occupation : Central Goods and Services Tax and Central Excise Sector A Naharlagun Arunachal Pradesh 791110 4: The Assistant Commissioner Age: Occupation : Central Goods and Services Tax and Central Excise Sector A Naharlagun Arunachal Pradesh 79111 VERSUS Mahabir Tiwari Son of Late Jagadish Tiwari, resident of C/o Laxmi Centre, Lida Complex, New Market, PO and PS Daporijo, Upper Subansiri District, Arunachal Pradesh 791122.
Advocate for the Petitioner : M K Boro, Advocate for the Respondent : Kemo Lollen, Arun Yun,Maryum Sora,Geli Taye,D Ado BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KARDAK ETE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE BUDI HABUNG 23.02.2026 (K. Ete, J) None appears for the appellant on call.
Mr. K. Lollen, learned counsel appears for the sole respondent.
This intra-court appeal is directed against the Judgment and Order dated 02.06.2025 passed in WP (C) 567/2024.
It is noticed that the delay of 40 days in filing the appeal was condoned in the absence of the learned counsel for the applicant.
It is also further noticed that on 2 (two) consecutive days, when the matter was listed, none represented the appellant.
In view of above, in the considered view of this Court, the appellant may not be interested to pursue the writ appeal. Accordingly, the writ appeal stands dismissed for non-prosecution.
JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant