Md Mukimuddin vs. Union Of INDIA And 4 Ors

Held

The Court prima facie opined that the ratio laid down in the Supreme Court case of Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Chandigarh Vs. ABC Papers Ltd., as quoted in Commissioner of Income Tax-I Vs. M/s Balak Capital Pvt. Ltd., would be applicable to the present case. This principle suggests that the jurisdiction to entertain a writ petition against an appellate order would lie with the High Court within whose territorial jurisdiction the assessing officer who passed the original order is situated. Therefore, the Gauhati High Court was likely not the correct forum for the writ petition, as the original order was passed by an authority in Imphal. The petitioner, acknowledging this prima facie view, sought to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to approach the appropriate High Court. The Court allowed this request, disposing of the writ petition on withdrawal with liberty granted to the petitioner to approach the jurisdictional High Court.

Facts

The petitioner, Md Mukimuddin, filed a writ petition before the Gauhati High Court challenging an order dated March 22, 2023, passed by the Appellate Authority-cum-Addl. Commissioner (Appeals), CGST, Central Excise & Customs, Guwahati. The appeal was rejected on the grounds of being barred by limitation. The original order was passed by the Superintendent, Zone-8, Imphal East, Thoubal & Kakching District, State of Manipur. The petitioner contended that due to an internet ban in Manipur, he was unable to file the appeal before the authorities in Imphal and was compelled to approach the appellate authority in Guwahati. The respondent GST authorities argued that since the original order was passed by an authority in Imphal, only the High Court of Manipur would have jurisdiction to entertain a writ petition against the appellate order.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Gauhati High Court has the territorial jurisdiction to entertain a writ petition challenging an appellate order passed by the Additional Commissioner (Appeals), CGST, Guwahati, when the original order was passed by the Superintendent of CGST, Imphal Range-I, Manipur. The petitioner argued that due to an internet ban in Manipur, he was prevented from filing his appeal within the prescribed time before the Imphal authorities and was forced to approach the appellate authority at Guwahati, making the present writ petition before the Gauhati High Court necessary. The respondent GST authorities argued that the jurisdiction for entertaining a writ petition against an appellate order lies with the High Court within whose territorial jurisdiction the assessing officer who passed the original order is situated. They relied on the Supreme Court's decision in Commissioner of Income Tax-I Vs. M/s Balak Capital Pvt. Ltd. (2022 LiveLaw (SC) 982), which quoted with approval the principle laid down in Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Chandigarh Vs. ABC Papers Ltd. ((2002) 9 SCC 1), stating that appeals against decisions of the ITAT lie before the High Court having jurisdiction over the assessing officer.