TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (1) TMI 101
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....itiated by the respondent No.3 under section 83 by provisionally attaching the amount receivable by the petitioner from its customer while issuing Form DRC-22 to M/s Deepak International Limited vide Memo No. EXN-JCSTE/SEZParwanoo/ 2020-21/1171 dated 28.10.2020 (Annexure P-2) and to M/s Fujikawa Power vide Memo No. EXN-JCSTE/SEZParwanoo/ 20209-21/1167 dated 28.10.2020 (Annexure P-3) being inter alia, illegal, arbitrary, misconceived, erroneous and even violative of principles of natural justice equity and fair play. c) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus, directing the respondent No.3 to revoke the provisional attachment and not to resort to further coercive measures against the petitioner. 2. A detection case under section 74 of the Himachal Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the 'GST Act' for short) and the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 read with section 20 of the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 was conducted against one of the suppliers of M/s Radha Krishan Industries, Kala-Amb, i.e. M/s GM Powertech, Kala-Amb on 10.10.2018 by way of search and seizure as provided under section 67 of the HPGST/CGST Acts. A s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ice, 5. It is not in dispute that respondent No.3 and the Divisional Commissioner, who has been appointed as Commissioner (Appeals) under the GST Act, are constituted under the Act and therefore, it is assumed that there is no illegal or irregular exercise of jurisdiction and the same would not result in the order being without jurisdiction. Even if there is some defect in the procedure followed during the hearing of the case, it does not follow that the authority acted without jurisdiction. It may make the order irregular or defective but the order cannot be a nullity so long it has been passed by the authority, which is competent to pass the order. There is a basic difference in between want of jurisdiction or irregular exercise of jurisdiction and if there is non-compliance of procedure, the same cannot be a ground for granting one of the writs prayed for. The defect, if any, can according to the procedure established by law, be corrected only by a court of appeal or revision. 6. In drawing this conclusion, we are fortified by the following judgments of this Court : Indian Technomac Company Ltd. vs State of H.P. and others, CWP No. 4779 of 2014 and analogous matters decide....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 9. A Bench of three learned Judges of as Court, in Titaghur Paper Mills Co. Ltd. v. State of Orissa, 1983 2 SCC 433, held: (SCC p.440, para 11) "11......The Act provides for a complete-machinery to challenge an order of assessment, and the impugned orders of assessment can only be challenged by the mode prescribed by the Act and not by a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. It is now well recognised that where right or liability is created by a statute which gives a special remedy for 1 enforcing it, the remedy provided by that statute must be availed...." 10. In other words, existence of an adequate alternate remedy is a factor to be considered by the writ court before exercising its writ jurisdiction (See Rashid Ahmed v. Municipal Board, Kairana, 1950 SCR 566). 11. In Whirlpool Corpn. v. Registrar of Trade Marks, 1998 8 SCC 1, this Court held: "15. Under Article 226 of the Constitution, the High Court, having regard to the facts of the case, has a discretion to entertain or not to entertain a writ petition. But the High Court has imposed upon itself certain restrictions one of which is that if an effective and efficacious remed....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....duce paragraphs 24 and 25 hereunder: "24. Section 19 provides for remedy of appeal against an order made by the State Commission in exercise of its powers under sub-clause (i) of Clause (a) of Section 17. If Sections 11, 17 and 21 of the 1986 Act which relate to the jurisdiction of the District Forum, the State Commission and the National Commission, there does not appear any plausible reason to interpret the same in a manner which would frustrate the object of legislation. 25. What has surprised us is that the High Court has not even referred to Sections 17 and 19 of the 1986 Act and the law laid down in various judgments of this Court and yet it has declared that the directions given by the State Commission are without jurisdiction and that too by overlooking the availability of statutory remedy of appeal to the respondents." 14. The Apex Court in a recent decision in Commissioner of Income Tax and others vs. Chhabil Dass Agarwal, 2014 1 SCC 603, has discussed the law, on the subject, right from the year 1859 till the date of judgment i.e. 8th August, 2013. We deem it proper to reproduce paragraphs 12, 13, 15, 16 and 17 hereunder: "12. The Cons....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... statute for obtaining relief. Where it is open to the aggrieved petitioner to move another tribunal, or even itself in another jurisdiction for obtaining redress in the manner provided by a statute, the High Court normally will not permit by entertaining a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution the machinery created under the statute to be bypassed, and will leave the party applying to it to seek resort to the machinery so set up.' 13. In Titaghur Paper Mills Co. Ltd. v. State of Orissa, 1983 2 SCC 433 this Court observed: (SCC pp. 440-41, para 11) '11. It is now well recognised that where a right or liability is created by a statute which gives a special remedy for enforcing it, the remedy provided by that statute only must be availed of. This rule was stated with great clarity by Willes, J. in Wolverhampton New Waterworks Co. v. Hawkesford, 1859 141 ER 486 in the following passage: (ER p. 495) " There are three classes of cases in which a liability may be established founded upon a statute. But there is a third class viz. where a liability not existing at common law is created by a statute which at the same time gives a special and particular re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Ram v. Municipal Committee, Chheharta, 1979 3 SCC 83. In the said decision, this Court was pleased to observe that: (SCC p. 88, para 23). '23. when a revenue statute provides for a person aggrieved by an assessment thereunder, a particular remedy to be sought in a particular forum, in a particular way, it must be sought in that forum and in that manner, and all the other forums and modes of seeking [remedy] are excluded.'" xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxx 15. Thus, while it can be said that this Court has recognized some exceptions to the rule of alternative remedy, i.e., where the statutory authority has not acted in accordance with the provisions of the enactment in question, or in defiance of the fundamental principles of judicial procedure, or has resorted to invoke the provisions which are repealed, or when an order has been passed in total violation of the principles of natural justice, the proposition laid down in Thansingh Nathmal v. Supdt. of Taxes, 1964 AIR(SC) 1419 Titagarh Paper Mills, 1983 SCC(Tax) 131 and other similar judgments that the High Court will not entertain a petition under Article 226 of the Constitu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dings, another remedy available to them was to challenge the said order(s) by the medium of appeal before the Tribunal, and again, if they were unsuccessful, they could have availed the remedy of revision before the High Court in terms of Section 48 of the HP VAT Act, 2005. Keeping in view the above discussion, read with the fact that the dispute raised in these writ petitions relates to revenue/tax matters, it can safely be concluded that the petitioners have sufficient efficacious remedy(ies) available. 17 .. . 18. Having said so, we are of the considered view that the writ petitioners have alternative efficacious remedy available and these writ petitions are not maintainable. Accordingly, the same merit to be dismissed in limine. However, it is made clear that the observations made herein shall not cause any prejudice to the petitioners in case they intend to file appeal(s) before the prescribed Authority and the period spent by the petitioners for prosecuting these writ petitions shall be excluded by the Appellate Authority while computing the period of limitation." [18] The apex Court in case titled Union of India and others versus Major General Shri....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Tribunal, moves before the High Court under Article 226 and the High Court entertains the petition and passes a judgment or order, the person who may be aggrieved against both the orders passed by the Armed Forces Tribunal and the High Court, cannot challenge both the orders in one joint appeal. The aggrieved person may file leave to appeal under Article 136 of the Constitution against the judgment passed by the High Court but in view of the bar of jurisdiction by clause (2) of Article 136, this Court cannot entertain appeal against the order of the Armed Forces Tribunal. Once, the High Court entertains a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution against the order of Armed Forces Tribunal and decides the matter, the person who thus approached the High Court, will also be precluded from filing an appeal under Section 30 with leave to appeal under Section 31 of the Act against the order of the Armed Forces Tribunal as he cannot challenge the order passed by the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution under Section 30 read with Section 31 of the Act. Thereby, there is a chance of anomalous situation. Therefore, it is always desirable for the High Court ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....C 337 ). In Thansingh Nathmal & Ors. vs. Superintendent of Taxes, Dhubri & Ors., 1964 AIR(SC) 1419, the Constitution Bench of this Court made it amply clear that although the power of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution is very wide, the Court must exercise self-imposed restraint and not entertain the writ petition, if an alternative effective remedy is available to the aggrieved person. In paragraph 7, the Court observed thus: - "7. Against the order of the Commissioner an order for reference could have been claimed if the appellants satisfied the Commissioner or the High Court that a question of law arose out of the order. But the procedure provided by the Act to invoke the jurisdiction of the High Court was bypassed, the appellants moved the High Court challenging the competence of the Provincial Legislature to extend the concept of sale, and invoked the extraordinary jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 and sought to reopen the decision of the Taxing Authorities on question of fact. The jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution is couched in wide terms and the exercise thereof is not subject to any restrictions ex....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ction 23 of the Act, and then ask for a case to be stated upon a question of law for the opinion of the High Court under Section 24 of the Act. The Act provides for a complete machinery to challenge an order of assessment, and the impugned orders of assessment can only be challenged by the mode prescribed by the Act and not by a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. It is now well recognised that where a right or liability is created by a statute which gives a special remedy for enforcing it, the remedy provided by that statute only must be availed of. This rule was stated with great clarity by Willes, J. in Wolverhampton New Waterworks Co. v. Hawkesford, 1859 6 CBNS 336 [, 356] in the following passage: There are three classes of cases in which a liability may be established founded upon statute. . . . But there is a third class, viz. where a liability not existing at common law is created by a statute which at the same time gives a special and particular remedy for enforcing it.... The remedy provided by the statute must be followed, and it is not competent to the party to pursue the course applicable to cases of the second class. The form given by the....