Anis Patel vs. Assitant Commissioner State Taxes Strand Road Charge And Ors.

Held

The Court held that a writ petition is not maintainable when an alternative statutory remedy of appeal is available and has been availed by the petitioner. The Court reasoned that two parallel proceedings concerning the same adjudication order cannot be continued. Therefore, without going into the merits of the writ petition, the Court was not inclined to entertain it. The Court explicitly kept all points raised in the writ petition open to the petitioner to be argued before the appellate authority, including the relief sought in prayer 'b' of the writ petition. The appellate authority was directed to consider these points in accordance with law.

Facts

The petitioner, Anis Patel, filed a writ petition challenging an adjudication order issued under Section 74(9) of the WBGST/CGST Act, 2017, by the Assistant Commissioner, State Taxes, Strand Road Charge. The petitioner submitted that they had already filed a statutory appeal against the impugned order. The Court noted that the adjudication order was appellable and that two parallel proceedings concerning the same order could not be continued.

Key Issues

1. Whether a writ petition is maintainable when an alternative statutory remedy of appeal is available and has been availed by the petitioner, particularly concerning an adjudication order passed under Section 74(9) of the WBGST/CGST Act, 2017. The petitioner contended that the writ petition was filed to challenge the adjudication order. The revenue (State) argued that the order was appellable and that the petitioner had already filed an appeal, making the writ petition infructuous or not maintainable. The Court did not explicitly record arguments from the revenue regarding the merits of the adjudication order itself, focusing instead on the procedural aspect of the writ petition's maintainability in light of the pending appeal.