M/S. Ursa Project P. LTD. And Anr. vs. The Com. Of CGST And Cen. Excise And Ors.
Held
The High Court dismissed the writ petition. Firstly, the Court held that the impugned order of the Appellate Authority dated September 16, 2019, was further appealable before the Tribunal under Section 86 of the Finance Act, 1994, making the writ petition not the appropriate forum. Secondly, the Court noted that the petitioners had participated in response to the show-cause notice, allowed the Adjudicating Authority to pass a final order, and then availed the statutory remedy of appeal before the first Appellate Authority. The Court found it inappropriate to interfere with the show-cause notice at this stage, which had culminated in a final adjudication order and a subsequent appeal. The dismissal was without going into the merits of the appellate order, and the petitioners were granted liberty to avail any statutory remedy in accordance with law.
Facts
The petitioners, M/s. Ursa Project Pvt. Ltd. & Anr., filed a writ petition on November 10, 2020, challenging an order dated September 16, 2019, passed by the Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise (Appeal). This appellate order arose from an adjudication order dated May 31, 2018, which was based on a show-cause notice issued on April 19, 2017. The petitioners sought to challenge the legality and validity of the show-cause notice on jurisdictional grounds, as well as the subsequent adjudication and appellate orders. The revenue authorities are the Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise and others.
Key Issues
1. Whether the writ petition is maintainable when the impugned order of the Appellate Authority is further appealable before the Tribunal under Section 86 of the Finance Act, 1994? Petitioner's contention: The petitioners argued that the show-cause notice was illegal and invalid due to jurisdictional issues. They also challenged the subsequent adjudication and appellate orders. Revenue's contention: The respondents, the Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise & Ors., implicitly argued for the dismissal of the writ petition on the grounds of alternative statutory remedies being available and the petitioners having participated in the proceedings.
Sections Cited
Section 86
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
2022 ks WPA 9326 of 2020 sl. 3 M/s. Ursa Project Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.
Vs The Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise & Ors.
Mr. Kartick Kurmej, Mr. Kushagra Shah, Mr. Aniket Chaudhury … For the Petitioners.
Mr. K. K. Maiti, Ms. Aishwarya Rajyashree, Mr. Tapan Bhanja … For the Respondents.
Heard learned Advocates appearing for the parties.
This writ petition has been filed on 10th of November, 2020 challenging the impugned order of the first Appellate Authority dated 16th September, 2019 passed by the Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise (Appeal) arising out of the adjudication order in original dated 31st May, 2018 on the basis of a show- cause-notice issued on 19th April, 2017. I am not inclined to entertain this writ petition and dismissed it for the following reasons: i)
Firstly, the impugned order of the Appellate Authority dated 16th September, 2019 is further appealable before the Tribunal, under Section 86 of the Finance Act, 1994. ii)
Secondly, petitioners intend to challenge the legality and validity of th
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 Calcutta High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.