The Delhi High Court quashed the objection raised by the Revenue Department regarding the maintainability of the writ petition that an unregistered partnership firm cannot file a writ petition, and permitted the petitioner to file an appeal with the requisite pre-deposit, citing Apex Court’s decision in Haldiram Bhujiawala v. Anand Kumar Deepak Kumar [(2000) 3 SCC 250], wherein it was held that an unregistered partnership firm can file a writ petition through a partner.
The Division Bench comprising Justice Prathiba M Singh and Justice Shail Jain considered Section 69 of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932, which bars an unregistered firm from enforcing rights arising from a contract, but observes exceptions as outlined in the case law of Haldiram Bhujiawala.
The Bench also noted that Section 69(2) does not apply when a statutory or common law right is being enforced, and since the petition seeks relief under the CGST Act and the petitioner has statutory registration, the Bench held the writ petition maintainable. The Bench also directed that the appeal be adjudicated on the merits without the limitation bar.
Briefly, in this case, the petitioner, a partner of an unregistered partnership firm, had challenged the order passed by the Sales Tax Officer as well as the show cause notices, raising a total tax demand of Rs. Rs. 1.09 crores, including interest and penalty. The petitioner also challenged the Notification No. 40/2021-Central Tax dated December 29, 2021, and Notification No. 40/2021-State Tax dated June 09, 2022, the validity of which is pending in a batch of cases, including Sarens Heavy Lift India Private Limited v. Sales Tax Officer [W.P.(C) 9060/2025].
Appearances:
Advocates Abhishek Garg and Naman Mehta, for the Appellant/ Taxpayer
Advocates Sumit K. Batra, Arun Khatri, and Anoushka Bhalla, for the Respondent
