M/S Daroga Pradhan vs. The Commnr. Of CT And GST, Odisha

Facts

The petitioner, M/s. Daroga Pradhan, approached the High Court of Orissa through a writ petition. The petitioner stated that the impugned assessment order came to their knowledge only when the demanded tax amount was recovered from their bank account. Subsequently, the petitioner obtained a copy of the assessment order. The Opposite Parties were the Commissioner of CT and GST, Odisha, and another authority.

Held

The Court did not express any opinion on the merits of the case or the validity of the assessment order. It acknowledged that the petitioner has a statutory remedy of appeal under the relevant law. Therefore, the Court permitted the petitioner to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to file an appeal in accordance with law. The Court also directed that any explanation offered by the petitioner for the delay in filing the appeal, on account of the pendency of the writ petition, would be considered by the Appellate Authority. No specific issues were decided on merits, and the operative direction was to allow withdrawal with liberty to appeal.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner has a valid ground to challenge the assessment order through a writ petition, considering the existence of a statutory appellate remedy. Petitioner's contention: The petitioner's counsel argued that the assessment order came to their knowledge only upon recovery of the demanded tax from their bank account, implying a lack of prior notice or opportunity to respond. However, the judgment does not record specific arguments made by the petitioner regarding the merits of the assessment order or the grounds for challenging it directly via writ. Revenue's contention: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the Opposite Parties (Revenue) in response to the petitioner's claims or regarding the maintainability of the writ petition.