BharatTaxGST

M/S. Gtl Infrastructure Limited vs. Union Of INDIA

Original PDF →
CWJC/1123/2024HC PatnaGSTCNR BRHC01126923202312 September 2024Bench: MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY,THE CHIEF JUSTICE-2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

Facts

The petitioner, M/s. GTL Infrastructure Limited, filed writ petitions before the Patna High Court challenging the rejection of their GST refund applications. The petitioner had previously filed a First Appeal against the initial rejection, which was also dismissed. The present writ petitions were filed as a further recourse. The Court noted that a further remedy before the GST Appellate Tribunal was available, but the Tribunal had not yet been constituted.

Held

The High Court held that the writ petitions were unnecessary and dismissed them. The Court reasoned that a statutory remedy before the GST Appellate Tribunal was available to the petitioner. Although the Tribunal had not yet been constituted, the Court directed the petitioner to file an appeal before the Tribunal as soon as it is constituted. The Court explicitly stated that the dismissal was without any observation on the merits of the matter, leaving those issues to be considered by the Tribunal. The ratio decidendi is that High Courts should generally not entertain writ petitions when a statutory appellate mechanism exists, even if its operationalization is delayed, provided the petitioner can avail the remedy once the forum becomes functional.

Key Issues

1. Whether the writ petitions are maintainable in light of the availability of a further statutory remedy before the GST Appellate Tribunal, even if it is not yet constituted? Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner implicitly argued for the maintainability of the writ petitions by approaching the High Court, likely due to the non-constitution of the Tribunal, leaving them without an immediate appellate forum. Respondent's Argument: The respondents, represented by the Union of India and its tax authorities, contended that the writ petitions were unnecessary and should be dismissed because a statutory appellate remedy before the GST Appellate Tribunal was available, even if not yet functional. They relied on the principle that alternative remedies should be exhausted before approaching the High Court under its writ jurisdiction.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1031 of 2024 ====================================================== M/S. GTL INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED, a Company within the meaning of section 2 (20) of the Companies Act, 2013, having its Registered Office at 3rd Floor, D/s-20, Markandey Complex, Gayatri Mandir Road, Kankarbagh, Patna, Bihar, represented by authorized representative, Dharam Nath Jha, son of Late Mahendra Jha, aged about 54 years, resident of Village Bishanpur, P.O. and P.S- Phulpras, Town and District- Madhubani, Bihar. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1. UNION OF INDIA through the Secretary of Central Goods and Services Tax and Central Excise, having its Office at Central Secretariat Building, North Block, New Delhi, P.O. and P.S. North Block, District- New Delhi. 2. Commissioner (Appeals), Central Goods and Services Tax and Central Excise, having his office at 2nd Floor, Central Revenue Building, Bir Chand Patel Path, Patna, Bihar. 3. The Assistant Commissioner, Central Goods and Services Tax and Central Excise, Patna, (East) Division, having his office at 2nd Floor, Central Revenue Building, Bir Chand Patel Path, Patna, Bihar. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== with Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 1123 of 2024 ====================================================== M/S. GTL INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED, a Company within the meaning of section 2 (20) of the Companies Act, 2013, having its Registered Office at 3rd Floor, D/s-20, Markandey Complex, Gayatri Mandir Road, Kankarbagh, Patna, Bihar, represented by authorized representative, Dharam Nath Jha, son of Late Mahendra Jha, aged about 54 years, resident of Village Bishanpur, P.O. and P.S- Phulpras, Town and District- Madhubani, Bihar. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1. UNION OF INDIA, through the Secretary of Central Goods and Services Tax and Central Excise, having its Office at Central Secretariat Building, North Block, New Delhi, P.O. and P.S. North Block, District- New Delhi. 2. Commissioner (Appeals), Central Goods and Services Tax and Central Excise, having his office at 2nd Floor, Central Revenue Building, Bir Chand Patel Path, Patna, Bihar 3. The Assistant Commissioner, Central Goods and Services Tax and Central Excise, Patna, (East) Division, having his office at 2nd Floor, Central Revenue Building, Bir Chand Patel Path, Patna, Bihar ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : (In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 1031 of 2024) Patna High Court CWJC No.1031 of 2024(8) dt.12-09-2024 2/2 For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Deepak Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Dr. K.N.Singh, ASG Mr. Anshuman Singh, Sr. SC, CGST & CX (In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 1123 of 2024) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Deepak Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Dr. K.N.Singh, ASG Mr. Anshuman Singh, Sr. SC, CGST & CX ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY

ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 8 12-09-2024 The writ petitions are against rejection of refund applications. Admittedly the petitioner had filed a First Appeal which was also rejected. There is a further remedy before the Tribunal which has not yet been constituted.

2.

The petitioner would be left remedy to file the appeal before the Tribunal as soon as it is constituted. The writ petitions are unnecessary and stands dismissed specifically without any observation on the merits of the matter which are left to be considered by the Tribunal.

Saurabh/- (K. Vinod Chandran, CJ) ( Partha Sarthy, J) U

Reproduced from the public record of the Patna High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.