Fakir Mohan Samantasinghar vs. The Addl. State Tax Officer, CT And GST, Jatni Circle

Facts

The petitioner, Fakir Mohan Samantasinghara, filed a writ petition before the Orissa High Court challenging a notice to show cause dated 24.02.2023, issued by the Addl. State Tax Officer, CT & GST, Jatni Circle. The petitioner sought intervention from the High Court against this notice. The Opposite Parties were the Addl. State Tax Officer and others. The tax period and the amount in dispute were not specified in the judgment. The procedural history is limited to the issuance of the notice to show cause and the subsequent filing of the writ petition.

Held

The Court held that it was not inclined to entertain the writ petition filed against the notice to show cause. The reasoning was based on the principle that the petitioner should first exhaust the available statutory remedies. The Court granted liberty to the petitioner to file an objection to the notice to show cause before the appellate authority by 31.03.2023. The ratio decidendi is that writ petitions challenging show-cause notices are generally not maintainable when statutory remedies are available and have not been exhausted. The operative direction was to dispose of the writ petition with liberty granted to the petitioner. No issue was expressly left undecided.

Key Issues

1. Whether the High Court should entertain a writ petition challenging a notice to show cause before the petitioner has availed the statutory remedy of filing an objection before the appellate authority? The petitioner, by filing the writ petition, implicitly sought to bypass the initial adjudication process. The revenue, represented by the Opposite Parties, would likely contend that the petitioner has an alternative and efficacious remedy available under the GST law, and therefore, the writ petition is premature and not maintainable. The Court did not explicitly record arguments from either side, but its decision indicates the revenue's position was implicitly accepted.