Writ relief against finalized GST demand denied where appellate remedy was bypassed and lack of knowledge was not proved.

A writ court will not intervene against a finalized GST demand where the taxpayer was served with the demand order, did not file an appeal, and instead pursued rectification before approaching the court after attachment of the bank account. The plea of non-communication and lack of knowledge was found unconvincing because the taxpayer retained GST registration and was obliged to file periodic and annual returns. Relief was refused, and the challenge to the demand and consequential attachment failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether writ relief should be granted against the GST demand and consequential attachment order when no appeal was filed and the petitioner claimed lack of knowledge of the proceedings.

Analysis: The petitioner had been served with a GST demand order under section 74 of the GST enactment and no appeal was preferred against it. Instead of pursuing the appellate remedy, the petitioner sought rectification and later approached the Court after the bank account was attached. The Court found the plea of non-communication and lack of knowledge unconvincing, noting that the petitioner continued to hold a GST registration and was required to file periodic returns and annual returns. On those facts, the Court held that the reliance on an earlier decision permitting delayed appeals was misplaced, as the present matter involved no attempt to file an appeal at all.

Conclusion: The Court declined to grant any indulgence and held that the petitioner was not entitled to relief.

Final Conclusion: The challenge to the GST demand and attachment failed, and the proceedings were dismissed.

Ratio Decidendi: A writ court will not grant relief against a finalized GST demand where the petitioner bypasses the appellate remedy and the plea of lack of knowledge is not credibly established on the record.

---