Page No.# 1/2 GAHC010201162026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/5178/2026 THE CHAIRMAN CENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT TAXES AND CUSTOMS (CBIC) DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI 110001 VERSUS JITENDRA PRATAP SINGH AND ANR PRESENTLY SERVING AS ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER/COMMISSIONER CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICES TAX AND CUSTOMS, RESIDENT OF 48, ARD COMPLEX, SECTOR 13, R K PURAM NEW DELHI 110066 2:UNION OF INDIA THROUGH THE SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE MINISTRY OF FINANCE NORTH BLOCK NEW DELHI 11000 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S C KEYAL, Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I., FOR CAVEATOR,MR. P P DAS,MR. SURAJIT DAS BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH MAZUMDAR ORDER Date : 28/09/2026 (Michael Zothankhuma, J) 1. Heard Mr. S.C. Keyal, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. K. Jain, Page No.# 2/2 learned counsel for the petitioners, who submits that in terms of Rule 54-B(6) of the Fundamental Rules (FR), the petitioners have the power to review its decision made pursuant to Rule 54-B(1) of the Fundamental Rules. However, the same has not been stated in the impugned order dated 12/06/2026 passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Guwahati Bench, in OA No. 040/00033/2025. He submits that if the petitioners are allowed to make a review of the order passed under Rule 54-B(1) of the FR by way of Rule 54- B(6), he does not wish to press this petition any further. 2. Mr. Tushar Ranjan Mohanty, learned counsel appears for the sole respondent along with Mr. A. Mishra, learned counsel on the strength of caveat no. 1016/2026. Caveat stands discharged. 3. Mr. Mohanty submits that he has got no argument to make in respect of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners. 4. In view of the submission made by the counsels for the parties, it is hereby clarified that subsequent to a decision being made by the authorities pursuant to Rule 54-B(1) of the FR, the petitioners have the power to make a review of the decision it makes under Rule 54-B(1), by application of Rule 54- B(6) of the Fundamental Rules. 5. The writ petition is accordingly closed. JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant