TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (7) TMI 1748
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 2017 / the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter collectively referred to as "the said Act"), to the limited extent that it remands the matter to the Adjudicating Authority. The petitioners also challenge the subsequent order dated September 16, 2025, whereby their application for rectification of the said Order-in-Appeal was rejected on the ground that it had been filed beyond the prescribed period of limitation. The Adjudicating Authority (respondent no. 2) had passed an ex parte Order-in-Original dated September 11, 2023, under Section 73(9) of the said Act, confirming a demand of tax, interest, and penalty aggregating to Rs. 18,19,565.91 for the financial year 2017-2018. The demand principally arose under two heads, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hemselves invoked the jurisdiction of the Appellate Authority by filing an application for rectification, and the said application has been rejected on the ground of limitation, the order rejecting the rectification application stands merged with the original Order-in-Appeal. It is, therefore, contended that no interference with the Order-in-Appeal is warranted in the exercise of the writ jurisdiction of this Court, and that it is open to the petitioners to avail themselves of the statutory appellate remedy against the orders impugned herein. Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties and upon consideration of the materials on record, the short question that falls for determination is whether the Appellate Au....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....odifying, or annulling the decision or order appealed against. The provision, however, unequivocally prohibits the Appellate Authority from referring the case back to the authority that passed the decision or order under appeal. Thus, the statute contemplates only three courses of action available to the Appellate Authority, namely, to confirm, modify, or annul the impugned decision or order. Where necessary, the Appellate Authority may undertake or cause to be undertaken such further inquiry as it considers necessary and thereafter adjudicate the matter on its own merits. The power to remand has been expressly excluded by the legislature. In view of the express prohibition contained in Section 107(11) of the said Act, remand was not a c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....stence of an alternative statutory remedy does not constitute an absolute bar to the exercise of the writ jurisdiction of this Court, particularly where the impugned action is ex facie without jurisdiction or in patent violation of an express statutory provision. The submission advanced on behalf of the Revenue is, accordingly, rejected. Accordingly, the operative portion of the Order-in-Appeal dated May 20, 2024, insofar as it directs remand of the matter to the Adjudicating Authority, is set aside. Consequently, the order dated September 16, 2025, rejecting the petitioners' application for rectification, is also set aside. The matter is remitted to the Appellate Authority (respondent no. 3) for fresh consideration. The Appellate....