M/S R M Trading Company (HUF) vs. State Of Punjab And Others
Facts
The petitioner, M/s. R.M. Trading Company (HUF), filed a Writ Petition before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana challenging an order. The respondents are the State of Punjab and others. The specific tax period(s) and the order or action under challenge, along with the authority that passed it and the amount in dispute, are not detailed in the provided judgment excerpt. The procedural history is limited to the filing of the present Writ Petition.
Held
The Court held that it was not inclined to entertain the present Writ Petition. The reasoning was based on the availability of an effective alternative remedy for the petitioner to assail the impugned order before the GST Appellate Tribunal, as provided under Section 112 of the Punjab Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The Court noted that the GST Appellate Tribunal has been constituted and has commenced accepting filings. Therefore, the petitioner was advised to pursue this statutory remedy. The ratio decidendi is that High Courts should generally relegate parties to statutory remedies when they are available and effective, particularly when a specialized tribunal has been established for that purpose. The Court dismissed the Writ Petition as withdrawn, leaving it open for the petitioner to pursue the appellate remedy.
Key Issues
1. Whether the High Court should entertain a Writ Petition when an alternative statutory remedy of appeal before the GST Appellate Tribunal is available, as per Section 112 of the Punjab Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner approached the High Court via a Writ Petition, implying a challenge to the order that would typically be appealable. The judgment does not record specific arguments made by the petitioner regarding why the Writ Petition was preferred over the statutory remedy. Revenue's Contention: The respondents, represented by the State of Punjab and others, would likely argue that the Writ Petition is not maintainable due to the existence of the alternative remedy before the GST Appellate Tribunal, which has now been constituted and is functional.
Sections Cited
Section 112
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
155 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CWP-14462-2026 (O&M) Date of Decision: 8th July, 2026. M/S. R.M. TRADING COMPANY (HUF)
.…...Petitioner(s) V/s STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS
......Respondent(s)
CORAM: HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHIT KAPOOR
Present Mr. Amardeep Singh, Advocate. for the petitioners.
Mr. Saurabh Kapoor, Addl. A.G., Punjab.
****
ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA, A.C.J. (Oral)
Since the petitioner has the remedy of assailing the impugned order in proceedings under Section 112 of the Punjab Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 before the GST Appellate Tribunal, as such we are not inclined to entertain the present Writ Petition as the GST Appellate Tribunal has been constituted and filing of appeals has begun.
Leaving it open to the petitioner to pursue such remedy, the present Writ Petition stands dismissed as withdrawn.
Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of accordingly.
[ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA] ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
[ROHIT KAPOOR] JUDGE July 8, 2026 Ess Kay
Whether speaking / reasoned
:
Yes / No Whethe
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Punjab and Haryana High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.