The Bombay High court, Goa Bench has quashed the order passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) citing the huge delay in passing the order.
The bench of Justice Bharati Dangre and Justice Ashish S. Chavan has observed, “when there is a huge delay in passing of the order by the CESTAT and though it is specifically contended by the learned Counsel for the Petitioner that the relevant point has not been taken into consideration, without going into the same, merely on the ground of delay, we are constrained to quash the impugned order and remand the matter back to the Tribunal for its fresh consideration. Needless to state that by taking into consideration all the points raised in the Appeal, the arguments to be advanced, and we expect the decision to be taken forthwith.”
The petitioner, M/s Himachal Futuristic Communication Ltd, challenged the CESTAT Mumbai Final Order which was pronounced belatedly on 28.08.2024, almost two years after the hearing.
The High Court noted this undisputed delay and held that such a long gap between the hearing and pronouncement violates the principles of natural justice. Without delving into the merits of the petitioner’s substantive claims, the Court quashed the impugned CESTAT order and remanded the matter back to the Tribunal for fresh consideration and an expeditious decision.
The Court also rejected the department’s argument regarding the availability of an alternate remedy, citing the Supreme Court’s ruling in Whirlpool Corporation v. Registrar of Trade Marks (1998) 8 SCC 1, holding that judicial review is justified in cases involving procedural irregularity or violation of natural justice.
Case Details
Case Title: Himachal Futuristic Communication Ltd. Versus UOI
Case No.: Writ Petition No.206 Of 2025
Date: 06/10/2025
Counsel For Petitioner: Lalita Phadke, Advocate
Counsel For Respondent: Asha Desai, Senior Standing Counsel
Read More: GST 2.0 Reform Brings Relief to Homebuilders: Construction Material Costs to Drop 3–5% Across India
