M/S. S.A. AROMATICS PVT. LTD AND ANR PRANAV SHARMA vs UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. — MAT/618/2026
Case under Central Goods and Service Tax Act Section NA. Next hearing: 18th May 2026.
CNR: WBCHCA0157782026
Filing Number
MAT/627/2026
Filing Date
01-Apr-2026
Registration No
MAT/618/2026
Registration Date
01-Apr-2026
Judge
Hon'ble Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj , Hon'ble Justice Chaitali Chatterjee (Das)
Coram
Hon'ble Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj , Hon'ble Justice Chaitali Chatterjee (Das)
Bench Type
Division Bench
Category
GROUP A (WRIT MATTERS) ( 1 )
Sub-Category
Miscellaneous ( 7 )
Judicial Branch
STAMP REPORTER (SR) SECTION
Last updated 17-May-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.M/S. S.A. AROMATICS PVT. LTD AND ANR PRANAV SHARMA
Respondent(s)
-
1.UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.
Case History
-
18-May-2026
Next hearingPending
-
18-May-2026
Group IV
Hon'ble Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj , Hon'ble Justice Chaitali Chatterjee (Das)
-
15-May-2026
Group IV
Hon'ble Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj , Hon'ble Justice Chaitali Chatterjee (Das)
-
14-May-2026
Group IV
Hon'ble Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj , Hon'ble Justice Chaitali Chatterjee (Das)
-
13-May-2026
Group IV
Hon'ble Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj , Hon'ble Justice Chaitali Chatterjee (Das)
-
10-Apr-2026
LD. Registrar Admn. (L and Om)View PDF
Case: M/s. S.A. Aromatics Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. vs. Union of India & Ors. (MAT 618/2026) Order: Case adjourned. The High Court at Calcutta (10.04.2026) found defects and errors in the appellant's petition and granted two weeks' time to the learned advocate to rectify them. The department was directed to cooperate with the appellant's counsel during the correction process. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
08-Apr-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
01-Apr-2026
Case filed
Registration No. MAT/618/2026
Case: M/s. S.A. Aromatics Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. vs. Union of India & Ors. (MAT 618/2026) Order: Case adjourned. The High Court at Calcutta (10.04.2026) found defects and errors in the appellant's petition and granted two weeks' time to the learned advocate to rectify them. The department was directed to cooperate with the appellant's counsel during the correction process. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts