M/S AYUSH SALES PVT. LIMITED vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Advocate - A.G. — WPT/96/2024

Disposed: Contested--DISSMISS FOR DEFAULT/NON-PROSECUTION on 01st April 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: CGHC010183402024

Filing Number

WPT/10377/2024

Filing Date

03-Jun-2024

Registration No

WPT/96/2024

Registration Date

21-Jun-2024

Judge

Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey

Coram

Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

INDIRECT TAXES MATTERS ( 4 )

Sub-Category

OTHERS AND MIXED BAG ONES ( 430 )

Judicial Branch

Writ Section

Decision Date

01-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISSMISS FOR DEFAULT/NON-PROSECUTION

Last updated 29-Apr-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.M/S AYUSH SALES PVT. LIMITED

    Adv. Sharad Mishra,NIKHIL PARAKH,NIKHIL PARAKH, ,PRASHANT SAHU,SANGEET KUMAR KUSHWAHA,SAURABH MISHRA,NIKHIL PARAKH

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Advocate - A.G.

  2. 2.The Joint Commissioner,

  3. 3.The Assistant Commissioner,

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 01-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan PandeyView PDF

    The High Court of Chhattisgarh dismissed the writ petition filed by M/s Ayush Sales Pvt. Limited against the State GST authorities due to the petitioner's default and lack of diligence. The court found that the petitioner failed to appear in two rounds of hearings, did not affix appropriate court fees, and failed to sign the vakalatnama, demonstrating insufficient interest in pursuing the case. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 25-Jun-2024

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh RajputView PDF

  4. 25-Jun-2024

    For Orders [On Office Notes]

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput

  5. 03-Jun-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. WPT/96/2024

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court of Chhattisgarh dismissed the writ petition filed by M/s Ayush Sales Pvt. Limited against the State GST authorities due to the petitioner's default and lack of diligence. The court found that the petitioner failed to appear in two rounds of hearings, did not affix appropriate court fees, and failed to sign the vakalatnama, demonstrating insufficient interest in pursuing the case. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case