M/S Ajay Traders vs. Union Of INDIA

Held

The Court held that the writ petition was not maintainable in the first instance, as the petitioner had an alternative statutory remedy available under Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017. The Court noted that Section 107 provides for an appeal to the Appellate Authority against any decision or order passed by an adjudicating authority within three months from the date of communication. While the petitioner had filed the writ petition within the time prescribed for filing an appeal, the Court was not inclined to directly entertain the writ petition without the petitioner first exhausting the statutory remedy. Accordingly, the writ petition was dismissed. However, the Court, in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, condoned any delay in filing the appeal and directed that if the appeal is filed within 30 days of the order being uploaded, it shall be heard on merits without the issue of limitation being raised. The petitioner was granted liberty to raise all legal and factual grounds before the appellate authority.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Ajay Traders, filed a writ petition challenging an Order-in-Original dated 29.04.2024 and a Rectification Rejection Order dated 29.05.2026, both passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Circle-L, Jaipur-III. These orders raised a GST demand of Rs. 16,26,623/- for the Financial Year 2018-19 due to alleged excess/wrongful availment of Input Tax Credit. The petitioner's subsequent application for rectification of the original order was rejected. The writ petition was filed on 17.07.2026. The respondents raised an objection regarding the maintainability of the writ petition, citing the availability of an alternative statutory remedy.

Key Issues

1. Whether the writ petition is maintainable when an alternative statutory remedy under Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017, is available to the petitioner? The petitioner contended that the writ petition was filed within the stipulated time period for appeal. The respondents argued that the petitioner had not availed the alternative remedy of appeal under Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017, before the Appellate Authority, and therefore, the writ petition was not maintainable. They relied on the provisions of Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017, which provides for an appeal against decisions or orders passed by an adjudicating authority.