TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (8) TMI 966
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Section 140(1) and 140 (7) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. 2.As against the order passed by the adjudicating authority, ie., the order-in-original dated 03.06.2020, the petitioner has filed this writ petition, by invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 3.It was canvassed primarily by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that there has been an error apparently on the face of the record, and in such case of error, if appeal is filed, there may not be some proper interpretation and therefore, justice may not be rendered to the petitioner. Therefore, learned Counsel wants to justify the act of the petitioner to approach this Court, without availing the appeal....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as paid - (a) in full, such part of the amount of tax, interest, fine, fee and penalty arising from the impugned order, as is admitted by him; and (b) a sum equal to ten per cent of the remaining amount of tax in dispute arising from the said order, [subject to a maximum of twenty - five crore rupees,] in relation to which the appeal has been filed. (7) Where the appellant has paid the amount under sub-section (6), the recovery proceedings for the balance amount shall be deemed to be stayed. As such the petitioner has appellate remedy to the impugned order, on filing of which they got stay of recovery proceedings. Thus the claim of the petitioner is without any legal basis and it is an undue charge on the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....case there is no lack of jurisdiction on part of first respondent and no violation of Natural Justice Principles (NJP) - Hence fit case for relegation of writ petitioner to alternate remedy of filing an appeal to Commissioner (Appeals) - II." The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Karnataka Chemicals Vs. UOI as reported in 1999(113) ELT 17 (S.C) has held that "2.We find that the question involved in this appeal essentially turns on the interpretation of the provisions of the statute. There are decisions of this Court where these provisions have been interpreted. In any case, when there is no challenge to the validity of any statutory provision, we see no reason as to why a writ petition should have been filed bye-pas....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ree months from the date on which the said decision or order is communicated to such person". 7.Like that, in Section 161 of the Act, it has been made clear that "without prejudice to the provisions of Section 160 and notwithstanding anything contained in any other provisions of this Act, any authority, who has passed or issued any decision or order or notice or certificate or any other document, may rectify any error which is apparent on the face of record in such decision or order or notice or certificate or any other document, either on its own motion or where such error is brought to its notice by any officer appointed under this Act or an officer appointed under the State Goods and Services Tax Act, etc. 8.Therefore, in both way,....