TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (8) TMI 648
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.....06.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge in WP(C) No. 5398/2021, WP(C) No.5358/2022, WP(C) No. 7336/2021 and WP(C) No. 780/2022, whereby the learned Single Judge has dismissed the above referred writ petitions with liberty to the petitioners to approach the Appellate Authority with a further direction that the period spent in this Court shall not be counted for calculation of the prescribed period of time. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant Company is operating a Hospital and is providing treatment to the patients for various illness and ailments. In other words, the Hospital owned and operated by the appellant Company is offering healthcare services. The case set up by the appellant Company before the writ Court is this that the appellant Company do not charge any GST from the in-house-patients and the tax paid on such internal transfer to the in-house-patients Department was not liable to be paid but on account of mistake, the same was paid in excess due to ignorance/ lack of clarity of provisions of law. It is further contended that on seeking legal advice, the appellant Company came to know that the services provided by its Hospital to the in-house-patien....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....017 (hereinafter to be referred as "CGST Act, 2017"). The learned Single Judge has refused to exercise discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India while observing that the impugned orders passed by the Assistant Commissioner, GST & Central Excise, Guwahati, whereby the refund claims of the appellant Company has been rejected, can be challenged by way of filing an appeal under Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017. The learned Single Judge, while taking into consideration the rival stands of the appellant Company as well as the respondents, has observed that there are some disputed questions of fact and such questions can be resolved efficaciously by the Appellate Authority and as such, the learned Single Judge has declined to exercise the writ jurisdiction, more particularly, to issue a writ of certiorari for setting aside and quashing the impugned show cause notices and the impugned orders. 8. Assailing the impugned judgment, Dr. A. Saraf, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant Company has vehemently submitted that the learned Single Judge has erred in dismissing the writ petitions on the ground of availability of alternate remedy of filing ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....herefore, contended by Mr. Keyal that the learned Single Judge has not committed any illegality in dismissing the writ petitions by the impugned judgment. In support of the above contention, Mr. Keyal has placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court rendered in PHR Invent Educational Society -Vs-UCO Bank & Ors., reported in 2024 0 Supreme (SC) 333. 10. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties, perused the impugned judgment and the material available on record. 11. The case set up by the appellant Company before the learned Single Judge is that they have paid taxes in excess inadvertently due to ignorance and lack of clarity of the provisions of law. The refund claims filed by the appellant Company before the respondents were rejected by the Assistant Commissioner, GST & Central Excise, Guwahati by passing the orders on different dates. 12. What could be gathered from the pleadings is that the appellant Company had challenged the said show cause notices as well as the orders, whereby the refund claims had been rejected. We are of the view that after issuance of the show cause notices when the final order is passed by the authority concerned, essen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in comprehensive procedure for recovery of the dues but also envisage constitution of quasi-judicial bodies for redressal of the grievance of any aggrieved person. Therefore, in all such cases, the High Court must insist that before availing remedy under Article 226 of the Constitution, a person must exhaust the remedies available under the relevant statute. 44. While expressing the aforesaid view, we are conscious that the powers conferred upon the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution to issue to any person or authority, including in appropriate cases, any Government, directions, orders or writs including the five prerogative writs for the enforcement of any of the rights conferred by Part III or for any other purpose are very wide and there is no express limitation on exercise of that power but, at the same time, we cannot be oblivious of the rules of self-imposed restraint evolved by this Court, which every High Court is bound to keep in view while exercising power under Article 226 of the Constitution. 45. It is true that the rule of exhaustion of alternative remedy is a rule of discretion and not one of compulsion, but it is difficult to fathom any reason why....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he interim order granted for the mere asking without assigning special reasons, and that too without even granting opportunity to the appellant to contest the maintainability of the writ petition and failure to notice the subsequent developments in the interregnum. The opinion of the Division Bench that the counter-affidavit having subsequently been filed, stay/modification could be sought of the interim order cannot be considered sufficient justification to have declined interference.' 18. The same position was again reiterated by this Court in the case of Phoenix ARC Private Limited v. Vishwa Bharati Vidya Mandir and Others, (2022) 5 SCC 345 : 2022 INSC 44. 19. Again, in the case of Varimadugu OBI Reddy v. B. Sreenivasulu and Others, (2023) 2 SCC 168 : 2022 INSC 1205, after referring to earlier judgments, this Court observed thus: '34. The order of the Tribunal dated 1-8-2019 was an appealable order under Section 18 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 and in the ordinary course of business, the borrowers/person aggrieved was supposed to avail the statutory remedy of appeal which the law provides under Section 18 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002. In the absence of efficacious alternative ....