Statutory appeal remedy and GST detention release mechanism govern challenge to penalty order and goods release.

Where an effective statutory appeal is available against a GST penalty order, writ jurisdiction is ordinarily not exercised and the taxpayer must pursue the appellate remedy, with all factual and legal objections to be considered by the appellate authority in a reasoned hearing. The Court also noted that detained goods and the vehicle may be released under the GST rules on furnishing security to the satisfaction of the competent authority, and directed the taxpayer to seek such release by appropriate application. The writ petition was accordingly disposed of with liberty to avail the statutory appeal and the prescribed release mechanism.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether the writ petition challenging the penalty order and detention proceedings was maintainable in view of the statutory appeal remedy; (ii) whether the detained goods and vehicle could be released on furnishing security in terms of the GST rules.

Issue (i): whether the writ petition challenging the penalty order and detention proceedings was maintainable in view of the statutory appeal remedy

Analysis: The penalty order was appealable under the statutory appellate mechanism. The petitioner could raise all factual and legal pleas before the appellate authority, which was required to decide the appeal by a reasoned order after giving an opportunity of hearing. In these circumstances, the extraordinary writ jurisdiction was not treated as the proper forum for adjudication of the challenge to the penalty order.

Conclusion: The writ petition was not entertained on this issue and the petitioner was left to pursue the statutory appeal remedy.

Issue (ii): whether the detained goods and vehicle could be released on furnishing security in terms of the GST rules

Analysis: The rules provided for release of the goods and vehicle on furnishing security to the satisfaction of the competent authority. The respondents did not dispute the availability of such release in accordance with the rules. The Court therefore directed the petitioner to approach the competent authority with an appropriate application for release.

Conclusion: The petitioner was permitted to seek release of the goods and vehicle on furnishing bank guarantee to the satisfaction of the competent authority.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition was disposed of by directing the petitioner to avail the statutory appeal remedy and to seek release of the detained goods and vehicle before the competent authority in accordance with the GST rules.

Ratio Decidendi: Where an effective statutory appeal is available against the impugned order, writ jurisdiction is ordinarily not exercised, and release of detained goods may be sought under the prescribed security mechanism of the GST rules.

---