M/S Laxmipathi Balaji Sugar And Distilleries P.LTD. vs. Commissioner,Central Excise,Customs And Service Tax,Bbsr Ii

Held

The Court held that there is an alternative remedy of appeal available to the petitioner to redress their grievance against the order passed by the Joint Commissioner, GST & Central Excise. The Court reasoned that the statutory appeal mechanism is the appropriate forum for challenging such orders. Regarding the delay in filing the appeal, the Court directed that if the petitioner prefers an appeal within thirty days from the date of the High Court's order, the period from the filing of the writ petition (19.04.2018) until the date of the High Court's order would be taken into consideration for condonation of delay under Section 14 of the Limitation Act. The Court also directed that no recovery should be made from the petitioner for a period of four weeks. The Appellate Authority was instructed to hear and decide any interim application along with the appeal expeditiously, preferably within four months of the appeal's filing. The writ petition was disposed of with these directions.

Facts

The petitioner filed a writ petition before the High Court challenging an order dated 31.01.2018 passed by the Joint Commissioner, GST & Central Excise, Bhubaneswar in Original No. JC/BBSR/CE-07/2018. The writ petition was filed on 19.04.2018. The Court heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the opposite party-Department. The Court considered the materials on record and was of the opinion that an alternative remedy of appeal was available to the petitioner. The Court directed that if an appeal is preferred within thirty days from the date of the order, the period spent pursuing the writ petition would be considered for condonation of delay under Section 14 of the Limitation Act. No recovery was to be made from the petitioner for four weeks. The Appellate Authority was directed to hear and decide any interim application along with the appeal expeditiously, preferably within four months of filing.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner has an alternative remedy available against the order passed by the Joint Commissioner, GST & Central Excise, Bhubaneswar? 2. Whether the period spent in pursuing the writ petition can be condoned for filing an appeal before the appellate authority? Petitioner's contention: The petitioner approached the High Court by way of a writ petition, implying a grievance that warranted extraordinary jurisdiction. The specific arguments made by the petitioner are not recorded in the judgment. Revenue/Department's contention: The learned Sr. Standing Counsel for the opposite party-Department argued that an alternative remedy of appeal is available to the petitioner, and therefore, the writ petition is not maintainable. The specific provisions or precedents relied upon by the Department are not recorded in the judgment.