M/S. Maa Sarala Fly Ash Bricks, Cuttack vs. Commnr. Of CT And GST. Cuttack

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

Heard Mr. R.P. Kar, learned Senior Counsel appearing along with Mr. A.N. Ray, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Sunil Mishra, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Revenue.

The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking to quash the notice issued by opposite party no.4 under Section 74 of OGST Act in Form GST DRC-01 vide Annexure-5 and to issue direction to opposite party no.3 to consider the application filed by the petitioner under Annexure-1 series, for testing of fly ash bricks with regard to the utilization of percentage of raw materials, pending since 20.05.2022, within a stipulated time.

Mr. R.P. Kar, learned Senior Counsel appearing along with Mr. A.N. Ray, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that without taking into consideration the components utilized for the purpose of manufacturing of fly ash bricks, the authority has issued notice demanding higher amount. It is further contended that even though the petitioner requested the authority to make random verification with regard to utilization of percentage of raw materials and thereafter take steps, but the same was not acceded to and, as such, demand has been raised in an arbitrary manner which the petitioner is not liable to pay. Therefore, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present writ petition.

Mr. Sunil Mishra, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Revenue vehemently contended that against the notice of show cause issued by the authority, the writ petition is not maintainable. In any case, if the petitioner has any grievance with regard to verification of fly ash bricks and utilization of percentage of raw materials, it is open to the petitioner to agitate the same, as has been raised before this Court, before the authority by giving reply to the notice of show case, so that the authority can consider the same and pass appropriate order.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after going through the records, this Court is of the considered view that since the components of fly ash bricks are under challenge, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the same at the stage of notice of show cause issued to the petitioner under Section 74 of the OGST Act. In any case, if the petitioner raises objection with regard to demand raised by the authority in the notice of show case and makes a comprehensive reply to the notice of show cause for verification of fly ash bricks and utilization of percentage of raw materials, it is open to the opposite party-authority to take necessary steps in accordance with law and, as such, this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.

With the aforesaid observation and direction, the writ petition stands disposed of.