Writ court declines vires challenge where GST input tax credit dispute depends on factual scrutiny and statutory appeal remains available.

A writ court may decline to entertain a vires challenge to section 16(2)(c) of the GST enactments where the dispute turns on factual scrutiny of excess input tax credit, supplier tax compliance, receipt of goods, and satisfaction of statutory conditions. The Court noted that the record did not establish a clear finding that the supplier failed to deposit tax despite invoices and payment, and held that these matters fell within the assessing and appellate authorities' domain. The constitutional challenge was therefore not examined in the writ proceeding, and the petitioner was left to pursue the statutory appeal subject to the prescribed pre-deposit and limitation requirements.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the writ court should entertain the challenge to the vires of section 16(2)(c) of the GST enactments in a case turning on the factual basis of excess input tax credit and supplier tax compliance.

Issue (i): Whether the writ court should entertain the challenge to the vires of section 16(2)(c) of the GST enactments in a case turning on the factual basis of excess input tax credit and supplier tax compliance.

Analysis: The proceedings were founded on the allegation of availing excess input tax credit as compared with the tax declared by the supplier. The record did not show a clear finding that the supplier had failed to deposit tax despite invoices and payment. The Court held that questions relating to whether tax was paid against the invoices, whether goods were received, and whether the statutory ingredients were satisfied required scrutiny of documents and facts within the domain of the assessing and appellate authorities. In that setting, the writ court declined to examine the constitutional challenge to section 16(2)(c) in the present proceeding, while leaving the petitioner to pursue the statutory appeal on compliance with the prescribed pre-deposit and limitation requirements.

Conclusion: The vires challenge was not entertained and the petitioner was relegated to the statutory appellate remedy.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition did not succeed on merits and the dispute was left to be examined through the statutory appeal mechanism.

Ratio Decidendi: A writ court may decline to entertain a vires challenge where the dispute depends on factual scrutiny best left to the assessing and appellate authorities and an efficacious statutory appellate remedy is available.

---