Cantronics Office Equipment Pvt. Ltd. A Company Incorporated Under The Companies Act, 1956 v. The State Of Maharashtra Thr The Government Pleader And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (ST.) NO.11594 OF 2022 WITH WRIT PETITION NO.10507 OF 2022 WITH WRIT PETITION NO.10509 OF 2022 Digitally signed by SHRADDHA KAMLESH TALEKAR Date:

2022.09.10 16:58:30 +0530 WITH WRIT PETITION NO.10511 OF 2022 SHRADDHA KAMLESH TALEKAR WITH WRIT PETITION NO.10513 OF 2022 WITH WRIT PETITION NO.10516 OF 2022 WITH WRIT PETITION NO.10518 OF 2022 WITH WRIT PETITION NO.10520 OF 2022 Catronics Offce Equipment Pvt. Ltd.

.. Petitioner Vs.

The State of Maharashtra And Others .... Respondents **** Mr. Sriram Sridharan for the Petitioner.

Ms. Shruti D. Vyas, 'B' Panel Counsel for the Respondent-State. CORAM : DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR AND ABHAY AHUJA, JJ.

DATE : 7th SEPTEMBER 2022 PC :

1.

In this batch of petitions, the petitioner has challenged, inter-alia, the orders dated 29th October 2018 passed by the Maharashtra Sales Tax Tribunal, Mumbai. All these orders were also challenged in statutory appeals which have been dismissed 1/3

by us by a separate order passed today in view of the Full Bench Judgment in the case of United Projects through its Partner Nisar Fateh Mohd. Khatri Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. 1. 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner tried to urge before us that the order passed by the Assessing Offcer was in violation of the principles of natural justice, and therefore, notwithstanding the fact that the appeals have been decided against the appellantpetitioner herein, the petitioner would still be entitled to challenge the order passed by the Assessing Offcer on the ground of violation of principles of natural justice.

3.

From the record, we can see that the Writ Petitions have been fled in the year 2022, whereas the order impugned in these petitions have been passed as early as in 2018. It appears that the present petitions were fled with a view to somehow get over the diffculty, which the petitioner would have to face on its failure to make a pre-deposit, which was a requirement, as per the law for fling of the statutory appeals.

Writ Petition No.2883 of 2018 with connected matters, dated12-072/3

4.

Even otherwise, we see that the petitions are barred by delay and latches, and therefore, we do not wish to entertain the same. 5.

The Writ Petitions are dismissed.

[ABHAY AHUJA, J.] [DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, J.] 3/3