Avik Kumar Goswami vs. State Of Karnataka

Facts

The petitioner, Avik Kumar Goswami, proprietor of Amit Engineering Works, filed a Writ Petition before the Karnataka High Court, Dharwad Bench. The petition sought to quash a notice dated January 22, 2024, issued by the Commercial Tax Officer (Audit), Hospete, and an adjudication order dated April 23, 2024, passed under Section 73(9) of the KGST Act, 2017, by the same authority. The respondents were the State of Karnataka, Commercial Tax Department (GST), represented by its Secretary, the Commercial Tax Officer (Audit), Hospete, and the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Tax, Davanagere. The petitioner was represented by Sri. R.M. Javed, and the respondents by Sri. Shivaprabhu.S.Hiremath, AGA.

Held

The Court held that the Writ Petition was not maintainable. The reasoning was based on the existence of an alternative, efficacious, and statutory remedy available to the petitioner under Section 107 of the KGST Act, 2017, against the order passed by the Commercial Tax Officer (Audit), Hospete. The Court did not delve into the merits of the notice or the adjudication order. The ratio decidendi is that High Courts should not entertain writ petitions when a clear and effective statutory remedy is available to the aggrieved party. The operative direction was to dismiss the Writ Petition, with liberty to the petitioner to agitate his grievance before the appropriate forum as permitted by law.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Writ Petition is maintainable in light of the availability of an alternative statutory remedy under Section 107 of the KGST Act, 2017, against the order passed by the Commercial Tax Officer (Audit), Hospete. Petitioner's contention: The petitioner sought to quash the notice and the adjudication order, implying a challenge to the merits of the GST proceedings. Revenue's contention: The revenue argued that an alternative and efficacious statutory remedy exists under Section 107 of the KGST Act, 2017, making the writ petition not maintainable.