Statutory appellate remedy bars writ interference where notice, reply and personal hearing satisfied natural justice in GST proceedings.

A writ challenge under the GST law was declined where an efficacious statutory appellate remedy was available and the dispute involved factual issues from departmental proceedings. The court held that interference under Article 226 was not warranted in such circumstances. Allegations of non-supply of the complete show cause notice and relied upon documents, and of breach of natural justice, also failed because the taxpayer had participated in the proceedings, filed replies, and received a personal hearing. The objection about incomplete notice was not raised earlier, and the alleged document reference error was treated as typographical. No ground was made out to quash the notice or the order in original.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the writ petition was not maintainable in view of the statutory appellate remedy under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017; (ii) Whether the show cause notice and the order in original were liable to be quashed for alleged non-supply of the complete notice and relied upon documents, and for alleged violation of natural justice.

Issue (i): Whether the writ petition was not maintainable in view of the statutory appellate remedy under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.

Analysis: The petitioner had an efficacious statutory remedy of appeal, and the challenge raised involved disputed factual questions arising from the departmental proceedings. In such circumstances, the writ court declined to exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction.

Conclusion: The challenge was not entertained on the ground of availability of the appellate remedy, and interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India was declined.

Issue (ii): Whether the show cause notice and the order in original were liable to be quashed for alleged non-supply of the complete notice and relied upon documents, and for alleged violation of natural justice.

Analysis: The petitioner had participated in the proceedings, filed replies, and was granted personal hearing. The objection that only three pages of the notice were received was not raised during the departmental proceedings. The reference to certain relied upon documents in the notice was found to be a typographical error, as the investigation related to the period from October 2018 to November 2019 and the relevant return records and e-way bills were available and dealt with in the order in original. No violation of natural justice was made out.

Conclusion: The notice and the order in original were not quashed on these grounds.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition failed on merits and the Court declined to interfere with the impugned departmental action, leaving the petitioner to pursue the statutory appellate remedy.

Ratio Decidendi: When an effective statutory appeal is available and the party has participated in the adjudication with notice, reply, and personal hearing, a writ court ordinarily will not interfere absent a clear breach of natural justice or jurisdictional error.

---