High Court rejects writ challenging tax order, directs appeal to Tribunal for legal redress

The High Court declined to entertain the writ application challenging the order passed by the Principal Commissioner, CGST & Central Excise regarding demand confirmation, interest recovery, and penalties on M/S. Deepak Petrochem Ltd. The court rejected the writ but granted the applicants the opportunity to raise legal contentions in the appeal process before the Tribunal, emphasizing the availability of legal recourse through the statutory appeal mechanism for aggrieved parties.

---

---

Issues:
Challenge to order passed by Principal Commissioner, CGST & Central Excise regarding confirmation of demand, interest recovery, and penalties on M/S. Deepak Petrochem Ltd.

Analysis:
The High Court heard the counsel for the writ applicants challenging the order passed by the Principal Commissioner, CGST & Central Excise. The order confirmed the demand of Central Excise duty, including Education Cess, amounting to Rs. 4,12,31,903 and ordered recovery from M/S. Deepak Petrochem Ltd. The order also imposed penalties and recovery of interest under relevant sections of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and CGST Act, 2017. Additionally, penalties were imposed on the Director and Manager of M/S. Deepak Petrochem Ltd. The Principal Commissioner's order was appealable, providing a statutory remedy to the writ applicants to file an appeal before the Tribunal.

The Principal Commissioner, CGST & Central Excise, passed a corrigendum imposing penalties and confirming the demand on M/S. Deepak Petrochem Ltd. The corrigendum specified the penalties and conditions for reduced penalties if the duty and interest were paid within a specified period. The corrigendum order was also appealable, allowing the writ applicants to raise all legal contentions and grounds before the Tribunal.

In light of the statutory remedy available through the appeal process before the Tribunal, the High Court declined to entertain the writ application and rejected it. However, the court granted the writ applicants the opportunity to raise all legal contentions and grounds available to them in the appeal process. The judgment emphasized the availability of legal recourse through the appeal mechanism provided by the law for the aggrieved parties.

---