Ambrish Sharma vs. Asst. Comms. CGST And Central Excise, Bbd Bag-1, Div. Kolkata North Commissionerate And Ors.

Facts

The petitioner, Ambrish Sharma, filed a writ petition challenging an adjudication order dated April 29, 2024, issued by the Assistant Commissioner, CGST & Central Excise, BBD Bag-I Division, Kolkata North Commissionerate. During the pendency of this writ petition, the petitioner has filed a statutory appeal under Section 107 of the Central Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017, against the same adjudication order. The Court noted that given the pendency of the statutory appeal, there was no justification to keep the writ petition active.

Held

The Court held that since the petitioner had already preferred a statutory appeal under Section 107 of the Central Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017, against the adjudication order, there was no justification to keep the writ petition pending. The Court reasoned that the statutory appeal provides an appropriate forum for adjudication of the dispute on merits. Therefore, the writ petition was disposed of. The Court explicitly stated that the disposal of the writ petition would have no bearing on the merit of the statutory appeal. No specific amount in dispute was mentioned. No issues were expressly left undecided.

Key Issues

1. Whether the writ petition should be kept pending when a statutory appeal against the impugned adjudication order has been filed by the petitioner. The petitioner argued for the writ petition to be heard on its merits. The revenue contended that the filing of a statutory appeal renders the writ petition infructuous and therefore it should be disposed of. The Court had to decide whether the existence of a statutory remedy, which has been availed, precluded the High Court from exercising its writ jurisdiction in this matter.