Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR & THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH MONDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 14TH PHALGUNA, 1945 WA NO. 327 OF 2024 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 6.2.2024 IN WP(C) NO.4166 OF 2024 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA APPELLANT/PETITIONER:
M/S SARATHY CARS PRIVATE LTD AGED 54 YEARS 6/1509-168B, KOLLAM-TVPM NH ROAD, PAZHAYATTINKUZHI, KOLLAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, RAJESH. S, PIN - 691010 BY ADVS.BOBBY JOHN S.AJAYGHOSH KUMAR VENKIDESWARAN.S FEVITHA K VISWAM RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:
1 THE STATE TAX OFFICER SGST DEPARTMENT, TAX PAYER SERVICES CIRCLE, KOLLAM WEST, ASRAMAM P.O. , KOLLAM, PIN - 691002 2 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER SPECIAL CIRCLE KOLLAM, SGST DEPARTMENT, GST COMPLEX, ASRAMAM P .O, KOLLAM, PIN - 691002 3 THE COMMISSIONER OF STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX DEPARTMENT 9THFLOOR, TAX TOWER, KILLIPPALAM, KARAMANA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695002
W.A.No.327/2024 -:2:- 4 THE CENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT TAXES AND CUSTOM REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER GST, GST POLICY WING, NO.503,B WING,5THFLOOR, CBIC, HUDCO VISHALA BUILDING, BHIKAJI CAMA PLACE, R. K. PURAM, NEW DELHI, PIN - 110066 SR.GP-SRI.V.K.SHAMSUDHEEN.
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04.03.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.A.No.327/2024 -:3:- J U D G M E N T Dated this the 4th day of March, 2024
Dr. Kauser Edappagath, J.
The appellant, a private limited company, engaged in the trading of motor cars and its spare parts, filed the writ petition challenging Ext.P9 assessment order and Ext.P13 rectification order passed under the provisions of CGST/SGST Act, 2017. The learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition, relegating the appellant to the statutory appellate remedy. It is challenging the said judgment; the appellant is before us.
2.
We have heard Sri.Bobby John, the learned counsel for the appellant and Sri. V.K. Shamsudheen, the learned Senior Government Pleader 3.
The appellant filed returns as mandated under the GST laws for the assessment year 2017-18 and remitted the tax as per the returns. Thereafter, the 2nd respondent issued discrepancy notice after scrutiny, mainly alleging the availment of excess input tax credit and utilizing the same for output tax.
W.A.No.327/2024 -:4:- The appellant gave a reply to the said notice. Ultimately, the 1st respondent passed Ext.P9 assessment order under Section 73(9) of the CGST/SGST Act. The appellant filed Ext.P10 application for rectification of the said order on the ground that there are apparent errors in the said order. The 1st respondent dismissed Ext.P10 application as per Ext.P13 order. The challenge on Exts.P9 and P13 is on merits. The impugned orders were passed after giving sufficient opportunity to the appellant for a hearing. It is settled that disputed questions of fact cannot be adjudicated by this court in the exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The learned Single Judge rightly dismissed the writ petition, relegating the appellant to the statutory appellate remedy.
We find no merit in the appeal. Accordingly, it is dismissed.
Sd/- DR. A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE
sd/- DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH JUDGE kp