Ashok And Sons HUF vs. Commissioner CGST And Central Excise

Held

The Court held that the petitioner has an alternative statutory remedy available. Considering the nature of the dispute and the fact that the Tribunal constituted under the Bihar Goods & Services Tax Act is functional, the Court disposed of the writ application. The principle established is that High Courts, in writ jurisdiction, generally direct parties to avail the statutory remedies when such remedies are available and the relevant appellate authority is functional. The Court granted the petitioner liberty to file an appeal before the Tribunal within four weeks from the date of the order. The Tribunal was directed to consider the appeal on its merits without raising objections regarding the delay in filing.

Facts

The petitioner, Ashok and Sons HUF, through its proprietor Ashok Kumar Tulsyan, filed a writ application before the Patna High Court. The petitioner challenged an order dated 30.04.2025 passed by the Appellate Authority. This order, while setting aside the Adjudicating Authority's order, modified it to impose a tax liability, interest, and penalty of Rs. 288,838/- upon the petitioner. The respondents included the Commissioner CGST and Central Excise Patna and various State Tax authorities.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner has an alternative statutory remedy available against the order of the Appellate Authority, considering the functionality of the Tribunal constituted under the Bihar Goods & Services Tax Act, as argued by the State. The State contended that the petitioner ought to have availed the remedy prescribed under Section 112 of the Bihar Goods & Services Tax Act, as the Tribunal is functional. The petitioner's arguments are not recorded in the judgment. The issue revolves around the availability and exhaustion of the statutory appeal mechanism.