Supriya Mishra vs. Additional State Tax Officer, CT And GST Circle, Puri
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORDER 05.05.2026
Challenging the Order-in-Appeal dated 24th February, 2026 passed by the Joint Commissioner of State Tax (Appeal), CT & GST Territorial Range, Puri, opposite party no.3, this writ petition has been filed.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that ex parte order dated 30th April, 2024 under Section 73(9) of the Odisha Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 read with Section 142(5) of the Odisha Goods and Service Tax Rules, 2017 has been passed by the Additional State Tax Officer, Puri Circle, Puri, opposite party no.1 in utter violation of the principles of natural justice and the findings and observations therein are contrary to the statutory provisions. Assailing said adjudication order, the petitioner filed an Appeal which was registered as Appeal Case ARN: AD210126004753N before the Joint Commissioner of State Tax (Appeal), CT & GST Territorial Range, Puri, which came to be dismissed vide order dated 24th February, 2026. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the reasons assigned by the Appellate Authority to reject the appeal are untenable and irrational. Through the petitioner had made pre- deposit for the purpose of satisfying requirement under Section 107, the Appellate Authority concerned proceeded as if the petitioner did not deposit the requisite amount. He further submitted that inasmuch as demand raised in the ex parte order passed by the Additional State Tax Officer, Puri Circle, Puri, passed in violation of principles of natural justice got affirmed by reason of rejection of appeal on flimsy grounds by the Appellate Authority, the impugned appellate order warrants interference in exercise of power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
Mr. Sunil Mishra, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the CT & GST Organization opposed entertainment of this writ petition against the Order-in-Appeal, as alternative efficacious remedy is available under the statute. He would submit that the Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal is not incompetent to consider the issue of violation of principles of natural justice and consider the deposit of amount for the purpose satisfying requirement under Section 107. 5. Heard Mr. Prakash Kumar Jena, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Sunil Mishra, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the CT & GST Organization.
At the outset it may be apposite to observe that the aspect of violation of principles of natural justice can be considered by the Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal. Whether the Appellate Authority on the facts and in the circumstances of the case has issued notice to the party concerned before rejecting
the Appeal can very well be appreciated on perusal of record by the Tribunal. The fact of deposit made as a requirement for filing of appeal under Section 107 can also be examined by the said Tribunal. The Tribunal being vested with such power to adjudicate on facts and in law, there is little scope for this Court to entertain the writ petition by exercising discretionary juri iction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The disputed questions of fact are left for the appropriate authority to consider. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Radha Krishan Industries Vrs. State of Himachal Pradesh, (2021) 3 SCR 406, held, inter alia, that where an effective alternative remedy is available to the aggrieved person, the High Court ought to restrain itself from exercising power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and when a right is created by statute, which itself prescribes the remedy or procedure for enforcing the right or liability, resort must be had to that particular statutory remedy before invoking the discretionary remedy under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. It is made clear that this rule of exhaustion of statutory remedies is a rule of policy, convenience and discretion.
In view of such enunciation of principles by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, this Court desists from entertaining this writ petition questioning the legality of the appellate order. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner, if so advised, to approach appropriate forum as available under the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and Rules framed thereunder.
With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition along with the pending Interlocutory Application(s), if any, shall stand dismissed. (Harish Tandon) Chief Justice
(M.S. Raman) Judge
MRS/Laxmikant
Reproduced from the public record of the Orissa High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.