M/S RAMESWAR STEELS vs THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS Advocate - DY.S.G.I., ,SC, FINANCE AND TAXATION,SC, GST — WP(C)/1606/2026
Case under Constitution of India Section ART 226. Disposed: Contested--Disposed Of on 01st April 2026.
CNR: GAHC010018312026
e-Filing Number
30-01-2026
Filing Number
WP(C)/1009/2026
Filing Date
30-Jan-2026
Registration No
WP(C)/1606/2026
Registration Date
17-Mar-2026
Judge
Honourable Mr. Justice Devashis Baruah
Coram
Honourable Mr. Justice Devashis Baruah
Bench Type
Single Bench
Category
10101 - Sales Tax ( 101 )
Judicial Branch
Writ Section
Decision Date
01-Apr-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Disposed Of
Last updated 01-May-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.M/S RAMESWAR STEELS
Adv. MS. N HAWELIA,MS S SARKAR,MS S SARKAR, ,MR S K SAHA,MS S SARKAR
Respondent(s)
-
1.THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS Advocate - DY.S.G.I., ,SC, FINANCE AND TAXATION,SC, GST
-
2.THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER
-
3.THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX
-
4.THE UNION OF INDIA
-
5.ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF CGST
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
01-Apr-2026
Honourable Mr. Justice Devashis BaruahView PDF
The Gauhati High Court dismissed M/S Rameswar Steels' writ petition challenging a GST order dated 30.12.2025 passed under Section 73 of the Assam GST Act, 2017, finding no violation of Natural Justice or statutory procedure. The court held that the petitioner received proper notice, submitted a reply, and has an alternative efficacious remedy under Section 107 of the Act, while excluding the petition filing period from the limitation period for appeal. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
23-Mar-2026
Honourable Mr. Justice N. Unni Krishnan NairView PDF
-
23-Mar-2026
Motion
Honourable Mr. Justice Sanjay Kumar Medhi
-
30-Jan-2026
Case filed
Registration No. WP(C)/1606/2026
The Gauhati High Court dismissed M/S Rameswar Steels' writ petition challenging a GST order dated 30.12.2025 passed under Section 73 of the Assam GST Act, 2017, finding no violation of Natural Justice or statutory procedure. The court held that the petitioner received proper notice, submitted a reply, and has an alternative efficacious remedy under Section 107 of the Act, while excluding the petition filing period from the limitation period for appeal. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts