COCP-4085 159 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT M/s Unicharm India Pvt. Ltd. Ajeet Kumar, Additional Commissioner of CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Present : HARKESH MANUJA, the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 initiated against the respondents on account of alleged willful non compliance of order dated 16157-2024 4085-2024 (O&M) [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH COCP No. Date M/s Unicharm India Pvt. Ltd. VERSUS Ajeet Kumar, Additional Commissioner of CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA Present : Mr. Surjeet Bhadu, Advocate and Mr. Veer Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Saurabh Goel, Sr. Standing counsel, CGST for the respondent. **** HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL) By way of present petition filed under Section the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, initiated against the respondents on account of alleged willful non compliance of order dated 25.07.2024 2024. The relevant part thereof is extracted hereunder: “It is also directed that in the cases which are listed in the urgent list category, notices are directed to be accepted and the interim order in the same terms shall apply with regard to refraining the respondents from making any recovery where the final order has been passed, and in case where final order has not been passed, the proceedings under Section 73 (1) of the CGST may go on but final order shall not be passed. All the respective counsel shall be informed IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH COCP No. 4085-2024 (O&M) Date of Decision: 03.04.2025 ...Petitioner Ajeet Kumar, Additional Commissioner of CGST ...Respondent HARKESH MANUJA Mr. Surjeet Bhadu, Advocate and Mr. Veer Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Saurabh Goel, Sr. Standing counsel, CGST By way of present petition filed under Sections 10 & 12 of proceedings are sought to be initiated against the respondents on account of alleged willful non 25.07.2024 passed by this Court in CWP . The relevant part thereof is extracted hereunder:- “It is also directed that in the cases which are listed in the urgent list category, notices are directed to be accepted and the interim order in the same terms ll apply with regard to refraining the respondents from making any recovery where the final order has been passed, and in case where final order has not been passed, the proceedings under Section 73 (1) of the CGST may go on but final order shall not be All the respective counsel shall be informed ...Respondents 12 of proceedings are sought to be initiated against the respondents on account of alleged willful non- CWP- “It is also directed that in the cases which are listed in the urgent list category, notices are directed to be accepted and the interim order in the same terms ll apply with regard to refraining the respondents from making any recovery where the final order has been passed, and in case where final order has not been passed, the proceedings under Section 73 (1) of the CGST may go on but final order shall not be All the respective counsel shall be informed SANJAY GUPTA 2025.04.04 18:25 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document COCP-4085 2. interim order learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent, however, despite the restraint order about finalization of proceedings, respondent went on to decide the case by passing order dated 16.08.2024, thereby 25.07.2024 passed by this Court. 3. of the respondent along with respondent Commissioner, CGST, Rohtak, who has joined the proceedings through Video Conferencing, subm interim order dated 25.07.2024 was passed learned counsel appearing for the revenue neither the said order was served upon the respondent; nor petitioner was present at the time 16.08.2024 before him so as to make him aware of the interim order dated 25.07.2024 terms of decision dated 16.08.2024 was a bonafide mistake on his part and thus, there is no the respondent submits that the though brought to the notice of the Legal Branch at Head Quarter/ Head Office, CGST, communication gap on the pa concerned. 4. through the records of the case. 5. order dated 25.07.2024 was conveyed to Legal Branch, Head Offi Gurugram, but there was some miscommunication on the part of the office and the officer concerned which resulted into passing of the 4085-2024 (O&M) [2] accordingly.” . Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though the order dated 25.07.2024 was passed in learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent, however, despite the restraint order about finalization of proceedings, respondent went on to decide the case by passing order dated 16.08.2024, thereby showing disrespect to the interim or 25.07.2024 passed by this Court. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent along with respondent Commissioner, CGST, Rohtak, who has joined the proceedings through Video Conferencing, subm interim order dated 25.07.2024 was passed learned counsel appearing for the revenue neither the said order was served upon the respondent; nor petitioner was present at the time 16.08.2024 before him so as to make him aware of the interim order dated 25.07.2024 and therefore, the finalization of proceedings in terms of decision dated 16.08.2024 was a bonafide mistake on his part and thus, there is no willful disobedience. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that the interim though brought to the notice of the Legal Branch at Head Quarter/ Head Office, CGST, Gurugram, however, there was some communication gap on the part of Head Office and the officer concerned. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the records of the case. A perusal of the record shows that though the interim order dated 25.07.2024 was conveyed to Legal Branch, Head Offi Gurugram, but there was some miscommunication on the part of the office and the officer concerned which resulted into passing of the Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though the dated 25.07.2024 was passed in the presence of learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent, however, despite the restraint order about finalization of proceedings, respondent went on to decide the case by passing order dated disrespect to the interim order dated On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent along with respondent-Mr.Ajeet Kumar, Deputy Commissioner, CGST, Rohtak, who has joined the proceedings through Video Conferencing, submits that though undisputedly interim order dated 25.07.2024 was passed in the presence learned counsel appearing for the revenue authorities, however, neither the said order was served upon the respondent; nor even the of passing of the order dated 16.08.2024 before him so as to make him aware of the interim order and therefore, the finalization of proceedings in terms of decision dated 16.08.2024 was a bonafide mistake on his willful disobedience. Learned counsel for interim order dated 25.07.2024 was though brought to the notice of the Legal Branch at Head Quarter/ , however, there was some rt of Head Office and the officer I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone A perusal of the record shows that though the interim order dated 25.07.2024 was conveyed to Legal Branch, Head Office, Gurugram, but there was some miscommunication on the part of the office and the officer concerned which resulted into passing of the Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though the presence of learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent, however, despite the restraint order about finalization of proceedings, respondent went on to decide the case by passing order dated der dated On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf Mr.Ajeet Kumar, Deputy Commissioner, CGST, Rohtak, who has joined the proceedings its that though undisputedly of , however, even the of passing of the order dated 16.08.2024 before him so as to make him aware of the interim order and therefore, the finalization of proceedings in terms of decision dated 16.08.2024 was a bonafide mistake on his willful disobedience. Learned counsel for order dated 25.07.2024 was though brought to the notice of the Legal Branch at Head Quarter/ , however, there was some rt of Head Office and the officer I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone A perusal of the record shows that though the interim ce, Gurugram, but there was some miscommunication on the part of the office and the officer concerned which resulted into passing of the SANJAY GUPTA 2025.04.04 18:25 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document COCP-4085 order dated 16.08.2024. 6. interim order dated 25.07.2024 representative was present at the time of hearing on thus, it cannot be opined that the respondent acted in willful neglect or willful disobedience of the interim order dated 25.07.2024. Besides this, even the resp through Video conferencing has tendered his unconditional apology and has circumstances, the apology tendered by the respondent is accepted. 7. directed to be careful in future about conveying such interim orders/ final orde 8. disposed of. 9. 10. stand disposed of. 03.04.2025 sanjay 4085-2024 (O&M) [3] order dated 16.08.2024. Admittedly, neither the petitioner served copy of the order dated 25.07.2024 upon representative was present at the time of hearing on thus, it cannot be opined that the respondent acted in willful neglect or willful disobedience of the interim order dated 25.07.2024. Besides this, even the respondent who has joined the proceedings through Video conferencing has tendered his unconditional apology also undertaken to remain more vigilant in future. In such circumstances, the apology tendered by the respondent is accepted. At this stage, the Head Quar directed to be careful in future about conveying such interim orders/ final orders to the officer concerned for appropriate In view of the above, the present contempt petition is disposed of. Rule discharged. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. 03.04.2025 ( Whether speaking/reasoned ? Whether Reportable ? Admittedly, neither the petitioner served copy of the n the respondent; nor even its representative was present at the time of hearing on 16.08.2024 and thus, it cannot be opined that the respondent acted in willful neglect or willful disobedience of the interim order dated 25.07.2024. ondent who has joined the proceedings through Video conferencing has tendered his unconditional apology to remain more vigilant in future. In such circumstances, the apology tendered by the respondent is accepted. At this stage, the Head Quarter, CGST, Gurugram is directed to be careful in future about conveying such interim orders/ rs to the officer concerned for appropriate compliance. In view of the above, the present contempt petition is Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also HARKESH MANUJA) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned ? Yes/No Yes/No Admittedly, neither the petitioner served copy of the ; nor even its .08.2024 and thus, it cannot be opined that the respondent acted in willful neglect or willful disobedience of the interim order dated 25.07.2024. ondent who has joined the proceedings through Video conferencing has tendered his unconditional apology to remain more vigilant in future. In such circumstances, the apology tendered by the respondent is accepted. ter, CGST, Gurugram is directed to be careful in future about conveying such interim orders/ In view of the above, the present contempt petition is Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also SANJAY GUPTA 2025.04.04 18:25 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document