2023 (2) TMI 1446 - HC - Service Tax

Efficacious Statutory Remedy: existence of GST appeal with pre-deposit ousts writ jurisdiction, so writ was not maintainable.

The primary question was whether a writ challenging imposition of service tax and penalties is maintainable when a statutory appeal under the GST ... Efficacy of statutory remedy of appeal under the GST Act - pre-deposit requirement u/s 107 of the GST Act does not render the appellate remedy inefficacious - extraordinary writ jurisdiction to challenge an appealable order - HELD THAT:- The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Assistant Commissioner of State Tax & Ors. Vs. Commercial Steel Limited. [2021 (9) TMI 480 - SUPREME COURT], has laid down beyond the pale of doubt that the remedy of appeal under the provisions of GST Act is an efficacious statutory remedy and ordinarily, the writ jurisdiction should not be invoked to examine the validity of a demand notice. None of the exceptions carved out by Hon’ble the Supreme Court are made out so as to entertain the challenge laid to an appealable order in exercise of the extraordinary writ jurisdiction. As a consequence of above discussion, we find no reason to interfere with the impugned order dated 18.04.2022 passed by the learned Single Bench in WP(C). Issues: Whether the writ petition challenging an order imposing service tax and penalties is maintainable when a statutory appeal remedy under the GST framework (requiring pre-deposit) is available.Analysis: The Court examined whether the existence of a statutory appeal under the GST regime, even where a pre-deposit is required under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, renders the writ remedy inefficacious. The Court relied on the principle that where an efficacious alternative statutory remedy exists, extraordinary writ jurisdiction should not ordinarily be invoked. The Court referred to the Supreme Court precedent (Assistant Commissioner of State Tax & Ors. v. Commercial Steel Limited) which held that the remedy of appeal under the GST provisions is an efficacious statutory remedy and listed the narrow exceptions to entertaining writ challenges to appealable orders. The Court found that none of those exceptions were present and that the Single Bench correctly held that the statutory appeal remedy was available and the writ petition was not maintainable.Conclusion: The writ petition is not maintainable and the appeal against the Single Bench order is dismissed; decision is in favour of the Respondent.