Andhra Explosives vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax
Held
The Court held that the writ petition is not maintainable due to the availability of alternative statutory remedies. The Court noted that the petitioner has remedies under Sections 30 and 31 of the GST Act, 2017, for revocation of the cancellation order, and under Section 107 of the GST Act, 2017, for filing an appeal against the order. The Court found that the petitioner's counsel could not provide any grounds to justify entertaining the writ petition without the petitioner first availing these statutory remedies. The Court reasoned that it is prudent to relegate the petitioner to the statutory remedies provided by the law. The Court dismissed the writ petition, leaving it open for the petitioner to pursue the alternative remedies if advised.
Facts
The petitioner filed a writ petition before the High Court challenging the order dated 14.07.2023, passed by the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Palamaneru Circle, cancelling the petitioner's GST registration. The registration was initially migrated from APVAT. A show cause notice was issued on 24.05.2023, to which the petitioner replied. The petitioner was also directed to appear for a personal hearing on 31.05.2023. The impugned order indicates that the petitioner did not attend the personal hearing on the scheduled or extended dates. The respondents, represented by the Government Pleader, raised a preliminary objection regarding the availability of alternative statutory remedies.
Key Issues
1. Whether the writ petition is maintainable in light of the availability of alternative statutory remedies under the GST Act, 2017? The petitioner argued that the writ petition should be entertained. However, the counsel for the petitioner could not demonstrate how the case fell within the recognized exceptions to the rule of exhausting statutory remedies. The respondents argued that the petitioner has an alternative statutory remedy for revocation of the cancellation order under Sections 30 and 31 of the GST Act, 2017, and a further remedy of appeal under Section 107 of the GST Act, 2017, before the appellate authority. Therefore, the writ petition should not be entertained.
Sections Cited
Section 30, Section 31, Section 107
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI
& THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A V RAVINDRA BABU
WRIT PETITION No.29330 of 2023
ORDER:
Heard Sri J.N Venkata Suresh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Commercial Tax for the respondents.
This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India seeking the following reliefs:
“...may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, more in the nature of writ of Mandamus, setting aside the impugned registration cancellation orders in Form GST REG-19, dated 14.07.2023, passed by the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Palamaneru Circle in Form GST REG-19 vide Ref:ZA37072302473389 and to pass such other order or orders.”
By the impugned order dated 14.07.2023 passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax, Palamaneru Circle in Form GST REG-19 vide Ref:-ZA37072302473389 the petitioner’s GST registration, after migration from APVAT, has been cancelled.
2
Learned Government Pleader raises a preliminary objection that the petitioner can avail the alternative statutory remedy for revocation of the order of the cancellat
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Andhra Pradesh High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.