Kss Petron PVT. LTD. vs. Joint Commissioner Of CT And GST, Bbsr

Facts

The Petitioner, KSS Petron Private Limited, filed a writ petition (W.P.(C) No.8903 of 2022) before the Orissa High Court challenging an assessment order. The High Court had previously disposed of this writ petition by relegating the Petitioner to the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT). However, the Petitioner filed a review petition pointing out that the NCLT had, in fact, granted permission to the Petitioner to pursue remedies against the assessment order. The Petitioner argued that this crucial NCLT order was not considered by the High Court when it passed its earlier order. The Opposite Parties are the Joint Commissioner of CT & GST, CT & GST Circle, Bhubaneswar-1, and others.

Held

The Court held that the earlier order dated 22nd February, 2023, which disposed of the writ petition by relegating the Petitioner to the NCLT, was passed without taking into account the order of the NCLT granting permission to the Petitioner to pursue remedies against the assessment order. The Court found merit in the Petitioner's submission that this NCLT order was a material fact that was overlooked. Consequently, the Court recalled its previous order. The ratio of this decision is that a High Court should consider all relevant permissions granted by other statutory bodies, such as the NCLT, when deciding the maintainability or disposal of a writ petition, especially when such permissions are crucial for the Petitioner to pursue their remedies. The Court restored W.P.(C) No.8903 of 2022 to the file for further consideration.

Key Issues

1. Whether the High Court erred in disposing of the writ petition by relegating the Petitioner to the NCLT, despite the NCLT having already granted permission to the Petitioner to pursue remedies against the assessment order? Petitioner's Contention: The Petitioner argued that the High Court's order of disposal was based on a misunderstanding or oversight, as the NCLT had specifically permitted them to approach the High Court or other appropriate forums for relief against the assessment order. They contended that the NCLT's permission was a material fact that ought to have been considered, making the earlier High Court order incorrect. The Petitioner relied on the NCLT's order granting permission. Revenue's Contention: The judgment records no specific argument from the Revenue Department regarding this issue.