GST writ challenge barred by limitation, and best judgment assessments sustained for failure to file required returns.

Writ petitions challenging GST assessment orders were held not maintainable when filed after expiry of the statutory appeal period, because writ jurisdiction should not be used to bypass an efficacious appellate remedy. On merits, best judgment assessments under section 62 were sustained where the assessee filed GSTR-1 but failed to file GSTR-3B, had admitted tax liability during inspection, and the department assessed liability on the basis of available records, inspection materials and input tax credit reflected in GSTR-2A. No ground was made out for interference with the assessments, and the challenge failed both on maintainability and on merits.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the writ petitions challenging the assessment orders were maintainable when filed beyond the statutory appellate period; (ii) Whether the best judgment assessments made under the GST enactment, after the petitioner failed to file GSTR-3B returns, called for interference.

Issue (i): Whether the writ petitions challenging the assessment orders were maintainable when filed beyond the statutory appellate period.

Analysis: The impugned assessment orders were passed on 15.10.2019, while the writ petitions were filed after the period prescribed for filing a statutory appeal had already expired. The governing principle is that writ jurisdiction should ordinarily not be invoked to bypass an efficacious statutory remedy, and a petition filed beyond the statutory limitation period for appeal is not maintainable as a matter of course. The Court applied that principle and found no basis to entertain the writ petitions.

Conclusion: The writ petitions were not maintainable on the ground of delay beyond the statutory appeal period, against the assessee.

Issue (ii): Whether the best judgment assessments made under the GST enactment, after the petitioner failed to file GSTR-3B returns, called for interference.

Analysis: The petitioner had filed GSTR-1 returns but failed to file GSTR-3B returns and had also admitted tax liability during inspection. Notices were issued, opportunities were given, and the assessments were made under section 62 on the basis of materials collected during inspection and the records available with the department. The assessed demand was also worked out after adjustment of input tax credit reflected in GSTR-2A. In these circumstances, no ground was made out to interfere with the assessments.

Conclusion: The best judgment assessments under section 62 were upheld, against the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The challenge to the assessment orders failed both on maintainability and on merits, and the assessments were left undisturbed.

Ratio Decidendi: A writ petition challenging a GST assessment should not be entertained after expiry of the statutory appellate period, and a best judgment assessment based on available records and adjusted input tax credit will not be interfered with when the assessee has failed to file the required returns.

---