Anjan Kumar Nayak vs. State Of Odisha

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking direction to the opposite parties to consider his representation under Annexure-3, by which he has made a request for payment of tax demanded by the State Tax Officer, CT & GST Circle, Bhubaneswar vide order of assessment dated 27.01.2022. 4. Mr. J. Pattanaik, learned counsel for the petitioner states that as per demand made by the authority, the petitioner has deposited certain tax, which he is not entitled to pay, as the same relates to pre-GST period. Therefore, for refund of such amount, the petitioner has filed a representation, which has not been considered by the authority.

Mr. Diganta Das, learned counsel appearing for the Revenue contended that if the petitioner is seeking refund of the above amount, then in that case he has to make appropriate application as per law, but, instead of doing so, the petitioner cannot approach this Court by filing the present writ petition seeking disposal of the representation, which is not permissible.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after going through the records, this Court finds that, by making an innocuous prayer for consideration of representation, the petitioner wants to get refund of his pre-GST period tax amount, which is not permissible. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to entertain this writ petition. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to pursue his remedy before the appropriate forum in accordance with law, if he is so advised.