SES Energy Services India Private Limited vs State of Maharashtra Advocate - GP OS, ,GP OS,GP OS — HCBM20104962026

Case under Central Goods and Service Tax Act Section 73. Next hearing: 06th July 2026.

Next hearing 06-Jul-2026

CNR: HCBM020104962026

e-Filing Number

23-03-2026

Filing Number

WP/10496/2026

Filing Date

24-Mar-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Shri Justice Suman Shyam , Hon'ble Justice Advait M. Sethna

Coram

Hon'ble Shri Justice Suman Shyam , Hon'ble Justice Advait M. Sethna

Bench Type

Division

Category

INDIRECT TAXES ( 17 )

Sub-Category

GST Goods and Services Tax ( 100 )

Judicial Branch

Original

Last updated 14-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Central Goods and Service Tax Act Section 73

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SES Energy Services India Private Limited

    Adv. Sriram Sridharan

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.State of Maharashtra Advocate - GP OS, ,GP OS,GP OS

  2. 2.Deputy Commissioner of State Tax (E

  3. 3., (AZAD NAGAR Nodal

  4. 4., (Azad Nagar Division) Mumbai

    Adv. GP OS

Case History

  1. 06-Jul-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 06-Jul-2026

    For Circulation

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Suman Shyam , Hon'ble Justice Advait M. Sethna

  3. 12-Jun-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Suman Shyam,hon'ble Justice Advait M. SethnaView PDF

    Case Summary: The Bombay High Court adjourned the writ petition filed by SES Energy Services India Private Limited against the State of Maharashtra to 6th July 2026. The State was directed to file its reply within two weeks with advance copy to the petitioner, and the petitioner was granted liberty to mention any coercive action initiated by respondents during this period. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  4. 12-Jun-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 24-Mar-2026

    Case filed

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: The Bombay High Court adjourned the writ petition filed by SES Energy Services India Private Limited against the State of Maharashtra to 6th July 2026. The State was directed to file its reply within two weeks with advance copy to the petitioner, and the petitioner was granted liberty to mention any coercive action initiated by respondents during this period. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case