M/S Infotech Computer Education vs. The Assistant Commissioner
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, M/s Infotech Computer Education, represented by its proprietor, filed a Writ Petition before the Karnataka High Court, Dharwad Bench. The petition challenged assessment orders issued by the Competent Authority for various tax periods, as indicated by Annexures-A, B, C, E, and G. The petitioner raised several grounds against these orders. The respondents included the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, the State of Karnataka, the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, and the Government of India.
Held
The Court held that an alternative and statutory remedy of filing an appeal under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, is available against the assessment orders. The Court noted that the petitioner had already availed this remedy for some of the orders. Consequently, the Court disposed of the Writ Petition, directing the petitioner to approach the Competent Authority if advised. The Court further directed that the Competent Authority may consider the time spent by the petitioner before the High Court while entertaining the appeal. All contentions of the parties were left open.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner has an alternative and statutory remedy of appeal under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, against the assessment orders issued by the Competent Authority? Petitioner's Arguments: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the petitioner regarding the maintainability of the writ petition or against the existence of the alternative remedy. Revenue's Arguments: The Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (AAG) argued that an alternative and statutory remedy of filing an appeal under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, is available against the assessment orders. The AAG further pointed out that the petitioner had already preferred appeals before the Competent Authority against some of the assessment orders and submitted that the petitioner should be directed to file an appeal before the Competent Authority.
Sections Cited
Section 107
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORAL ORDER
Sri.H.R.Kambiyavar., counsel for the petitioner, Sri.Gangadhar J.M., AAG along with Sri.Praveen K.Uppar., AGA for respondents 1 to 3 have appeared in person. Sri.Girish S.Hulmani., counsel for respondent No.4 has appeared through video conferencing.
The captioned Writ Petition is filed seeking several reliefs. NC: 2025:KHC-D:5733
Counsel for the respective parties urged several contentions. Heard the arguments and perused the Writ papers with care.
The Assessment orders were issued by the Competent Authority for different tax period. The same are called into question in this Writ Petition vide Annexures-A, B, C, E and G on several grounds as set out in the Memorandum of Writ Petition.
AAG submits that as against the assessment order, there is an alternate and statutory remedy of filing an appeal under Section 107 of Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017. He argued by saying that as against some of the assessment orders, the assessee has preferred an appeal before the Competent Authority. AAG therefore, submits that the petitioner may be directed to file an appeal before the Competent Authority.
As against the assessment orders, there is an alternate and statutory remedy of filing an appeal under Section 107 of Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017. NC: 2025:KHC-D:5733
Resultantly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. The petitioner may approach the Competent Authority, if so advised. The Authority may consider the time spent by the petitioner before this Court while entertaining the appeal. All the contentions of the parties are left open. (JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE
MRP,CLK LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 40
Reproduced from the public record of the Karnataka High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.