Taxpayer's Challenge Rejected: Statutory Remedies Must Be Exhausted Before Seeking Extraordinary Judicial Intervention Under Section 107

HC dismissed writ petition challenging tax order, ruling that the petitioner must first exhaust statutory remedies under Section 107 of CGST Act. The court emphasized the availability of alternative appeal mechanism and declined to intervene through Article 226, thereby preserving the petitioner's right to challenge the order through prescribed legal channels.

---

---

Issues involved:
The issues involved in the judgment are the quashing of Ext.P9 order passed by the respondent u/s 74(9) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (CGST Act) and the availability of alternative statutory remedy under Section 107 of the CGST Act.

Quashing of Ext.P9 Order:
The petitioner, a Company trading in tile materials, filed a writ petition to quash Ext.P9 order passed by the respondent. The petitioner's contention was that the order was passed without verifying the books of account of its sister concern, which was the main allegation against the petitioner. The petitioner argued that Ext.P9 order was ex-facie illegal and arbitrary. The High Court, after hearing both parties, noted that Ext.P9 order was passed u/s 74(9) of the CGST Act. It stated that such orders are appealable u/s 107 of the CGST Act. Consequently, the Court declined to entertain the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, emphasizing the availability of alternative statutory remedies for the petitioner. The writ petition was dismissed, allowing the petitioner to pursue its statutory remedies in accordance with the law.

Availability of Alternative Statutory Remedy:
The High Court highlighted that an order passed u/s 74(9) of the CGST Act is subject to appeal u/s 107 of the same Act. Recognizing this alternative statutory remedy, the Court emphasized that the petitioner should avail themselves of the statutory appeal process rather than seeking relief through a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. By dismissing the writ petition, the Court ensured that the petitioner's right to pursue statutory remedies in accordance with the law was preserved.

---