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

Held

The Court held that it was not inclined to entertain the writ petition. The reasoning was based on the fact that the impugned order was an appellable order and the petitioner had already filed a statutory appeal against it. The Court emphasized that two parallel proceedings against the same adjudication order could not be continued. Consequently, the Court kept all points raised in the writ petition open to be considered by the appellate authority, including the relief sought in prayer 'b' of the writ petition, to be decided in accordance with law. The Court did not go into the merits of the writ petition.

Facts

The petitioner, Anis Patel, filed a writ petition challenging an adjudication order passed under Section 74(9) of the WBGST/CGST Act, 2017. The petitioner submitted that they had already filed a statutory appeal against the said adjudication order before the appellate authority. The State and other respondents were represented. The court noted that two parallel proceedings could not be continued against the same adjudication order.

Key Issues

1. Whether the High Court should entertain a writ petition challenging an order that is appealable under the statute, especially when a statutory appeal has already been filed by the petitioner? Petitioner's contention: The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging the adjudication order. The judgment does not record specific arguments from the petitioner regarding why the writ petition should be entertained despite the availability of an appeal. Revenue/State's contention: The State, through its learned advocates, was present. The judgment does not record specific arguments from the State regarding the maintainability of the writ petition.