HC refuses to hear GST petitions, directs taxpayers to exhaust statutory appeals first under Section 107

The HC declined to entertain petitions challenging Orders-in-Original by Deputy Commissioner of State GST, emphasizing the principle of exhausting alternate statutory remedies before judicial intervention. Despite petitioner's arguments regarding non-consideration of documents and pre-deposit requirements making appeals less efficacious, the Court held that the Appellate Authority was best suited to examine alleged breaches of natural justice. Following precedent in Oberoi Constructions vs. Union of India, the HC disposed of petitions with liberty to file appeals before the Appellate Authority within four weeks, directing consideration on merits without limitation issues.

---

---

Issues:
Challenge to Orders-in-Original by Deputy Commissioner of State GST; Consideration of documents submitted by petitioner; Efficacy of alternate remedy of appeal; Pre-deposit requirement for appeal; Breach of natural justice; Bar of alternative remedies.

Analysis:
The petitions before the High Court challenged the Orders-in-Original issued by the Deputy Commissioner of State GST. The petitioner argued that the two petitions could be disposed of together as they involved similar legal and factual issues but pertained to different financial years. The main contention raised was the alleged non-consideration of documents submitted by the petitioner, which was claimed to be a breach of natural justice. Additionally, the petitioner argued that the pre-deposit requirement for maintaining an appeal, amounting to 10% of the tax demand, made the appeal remedy less efficacious, rendering the alternate remedy inadequate.

The High Court considered the arguments presented by both parties and emphasized the importance of exhausting alternate statutory remedies before approaching the court. The Court noted that the requirement of a pre-deposit for appeals and the alleged non-consideration of some documents did not necessarily dilute the efficacy of the alternate remedy provided by the statute. The Court highlighted that the Appellate Authority was best suited to examine matters related to the alleged breach of natural justice and adequacy of opportunities provided during the adjudication process.

In a previous case, 'Oberoi Constructions vs. Union of India', the Court had discussed the principle of exhausting alternative remedies before seeking judicial intervention. Following the reasoning in that case, the High Court declined to entertain the present petitions but granted the petitioners the liberty to file appeals challenging the impugned orders before the Appellate Authority. The Court directed the petitioners to file the appeals within four weeks and instructed the Appellate Authority to consider the appeals on their merits without considering any limitation issues, given the timely filing of the petitions before the High Court.

Ultimately, the High Court disposed of the petitions with the liberty granted to the petitioners to pursue appeals as an alternate remedy. The Court emphasized that all concerned parties must adhere to the order, and any interim orders or applications were vacated and disposed of accordingly. No costs were awarded in the matter.

---