M/S Dutta Medicose vs. The Union Of INDIA

Held

The Court considered the fact that the petitioner had filed the writ application within 120 days. It noted that Section 107 of the GST Act allows for appeals to be filed after three months, with the appellate authority having the power to condone the delay for up to one month if sufficient cause is shown. Therefore, the total period for filing an appeal, including the condonable period, could extend up to 120 days. Given this, the Court disposed of the writ application, granting the petitioner liberty to file an appeal within three weeks. The Court directed that if such an appeal is filed within the stipulated period, the Appellate Authority shall decide it on its merits, in accordance with the law, without considering the delay. No specific issue was expressly left undecided.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Dutta Medicose, a proprietorship firm, filed a writ application before the Patna High Court challenging two orders: an order dated 11.09.2025 rejecting an application under Section 128A of the GST Act, and an order dated 30.09.2025 passed under Section 74 of the GST Act, along with a demand notice in Form DRC-07. The petitioner sought to quash these orders. The respondents, including the Union of India and the State of Bihar, were represented. The State counsel argued that the petitioner had an alternative statutory remedy of appeal under Section 107 of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, which allows for appeals within three months, extendable by one month upon sufficient cause.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner, having an alternative statutory remedy of appeal under Section 107 of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, is precluded from filing a writ application before this Court? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner filed a writ application directly before the High Court. The judgment does not explicitly record arguments from the petitioner on this specific issue, but their action implies a belief that the writ route was appropriate or that the statutory remedy was not fully available or effective. Revenue/State's Contention: The State argued that the petitioner has a clear statutory remedy of appeal under Section 107 of the BGST Act. This section permits an appeal within three months of the order's communication, with a further condonable period of one month for filing the appeal if sufficient cause is shown. Therefore, the petitioner should have availed this appellate mechanism instead of approaching the High Court directly.