Writ petition dismissed as withdrawn, petitioner directed to pursue available statutory appeal under Section 107 CGST Act 2017

The HC dismissed the writ petition as withdrawn after noting that the petitioner had an available statutory remedy of appeal under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The court directed the petitioner to pursue the already filed appeal under the OGST Act/CGST Act. To facilitate compliance with Rule 108(3) of the CGST/OGST Rules, the registry was instructed to return the original impugned order by substituting it with a photocopy for the petitioner's appeal proceedings.

---

---

Issues:
1. Advancing the date of posting in a writ petition.
2. Withdrawal of a writ petition to avail statutory remedy under the CGST Act.

Issue 1: Advancing the date of posting in a writ petition
The petitioner filed I.A. No.8421 of 2022 to advance the date of posting from 12th August, 2022, to an earlier date. The petitioner-company decided to withdraw the writ petition to avail statutory remedy, leading to urgent listing of the matter. With no objection from the opposite parties, the date specified in the previous order was advanced, and the matter was taken up for consideration on the same day. Consequently, I.A. No.8421 of 2022 was allowed.

Issue 2: Withdrawal of a writ petition to avail statutory remedy under the CGST Act
The petitioner had filed a writ petition challenging an order passed under the OGST Act/CGST Act for the tax periods from April 2020 to March 2021. The prayers sought included setting aside the impugned order, commanding the opposite parties not to give effect to the order, and prohibiting them from taking any steps pursuant to the order. The court, on a previous date, observed various aspects of the case, including the involvement of JSW Steel Ltd. in different states and the utilization of input tax credit. Despite objections regarding the availability of an alternative remedy, the court issued notice in the matter. The petitioner subsequently approached the Supreme Court, and later decided to withdraw the writ petition to pursue the statutory remedy of appeal under Section 107 of the CGST Act. The writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn, allowing the petitioner to pursue the appeal already filed. The conduct of the petitioner was noted, indicating a change in approach from seeking interim relief to challenging the assessment order under the OGST Act. The court emphasized the importance of opting for statutory remedies and criticized the petitioner's approach as a form of luxury litigation, overburdening the court with time-consuming proceedings.

---