TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Writ Petition Not Maintainable When Alternative Remedy Exists Under Section 107 of the 2017 Act</h1> The HC held that the writ petition was not maintainable due to the availability of an alternative remedy under Section 107 of the Act of 2017. The court ... Maintainability of petition - availability of alternative remedy - relevant documents were not supplied by the CGST authority to the petitioners before passing order - violation of principles of natural justice - HELD THAT:- What is important in deciding the lis is presence of appeal provision under Section 107 of said Act of 2017. Question arises whether in spite of availability of appeal provision the writ Court at this stage would embark upon to decide the grievance as ventilated by the petitioners. It is trite law that when there is alternative efficacious speedy remedy available under the statute writ Court ought not entertain writ petition ignoring the appeal provision. In this regard reliance is placed on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in General Manager, Sri Siddeshwara Co-operative Bank Limited & Anr. Vs. Ikbal & Ors. [2013 (9) TMI 216 - SUPREME COURT] where it was held that the High Court erred in exercising its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 and in quashing the sale certificate and demand notice. Time consumed from the date of filing this writ petition till today shall be excluded while considering the prayer of the petitioners for condonation of delay in preferring appeal under Section 107, if such prayer for condonation of delay is made before the Appellate Authority. Petition disposed off. ISSUES: Whether the adjudicating authority violated principles of natural justice by not supplying relevant documents to the petitioners before passing the order under Section 74 of the CGST Act, 2017.Whether the writ court should entertain the writ petition despite the existence of an alternative remedy by way of appeal under Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017.Whether leave should be granted to prefer an appeal against the order dated 24th December, 2024. RULINGS / HOLDINGS: On the issue of natural justice, the court recognized the contention that relevant documents were not supplied to the petitioners, which 'prevented the petitioners from making meaningful deliberation' before the adjudicating authority, and found it appropriate to keep this issue alive for appellate consideration.Regarding the availability of an alternative remedy, the court held that 'when there is alternative efficacious speedy remedy available under the statute writ Court ought not entertain writ petition ignoring the appeal provision,' emphasizing the appeal provision under Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017.The court granted leave to the petitioners to prefer an appeal under Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017 within a stipulated time frame and directed that the interim order previously granted shall continue until the appeal is disposed of. RATIONALE: The court applied the statutory framework of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, particularly Sections 74 (adjudication of tax demands) and 107 (appeal against orders of adjudicating authority).The principle that writ jurisdiction is generally not exercised where an alternative statutory remedy is available was reaffirmed, citing established Supreme Court precedent emphasizing the need for exhaustion of such remedies before approaching the writ court.The court acknowledged a potential violation of natural justice due to non-supply of relevant documents, which warranted appellate scrutiny rather than outright dismissal of the petition.No dissent or doctrinal shift was indicated; the judgment followed conventional legal principles balancing procedural fairness and statutory remedies.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
