M/S Rajasthan Khadi Gramodhyog Sansthan Sangh vs. State Of Rajasthan

Held

The High Court held that since the GST Tribunal has been constituted under Section 112 of the CGST Act, 2017, an equally efficacious remedy is now available to the petitioners. Consequently, the Court was not inclined to exercise its extraordinary writ jurisdiction. The Court ordered that all the writ petitions be remanded to the learned GST Tribunal for adjudication on merit. All issues and contentions raised in the writ petitions were expressly kept open to be decided by the Tribunal. The time taken by the petitioners in pursuing the writ remedy before the High Court would not be computed for the purposes of limitation, provided they approach the Tribunal within 30 days of the order being uploaded.

Facts

Multiple writ petitions were filed before the Rajasthan High Court challenging various orders and actions under the Goods and Services Tax (GST) regime. The petitioners, including companies like M/s Shree Krishna Rolling Mills (Jaipur) Ltd, M/s HPM Chemicals And Fertilizers Ltd., and individuals representing businesses, sought relief against actions taken by GST authorities. The specific tax periods and amounts in dispute varied across the petitions. The procedural history involved the filing of these writ petitions before the High Court, where they were pending adjudication.

Key Issues

1. Whether the High Court should exercise its extraordinary writ jurisdiction given the constitution of the GST Tribunal under Section 112 of the CGST Act, 2017, and the availability of an equally efficacious remedy. Petitioner's Contention: The petitioners had approached the High Court seeking redressal of their grievances, implying that the writ jurisdiction was appropriately invoked. Respondent's Contention: The respondent authorities, by implication of the Court's order, would have argued that the constitution of the GST Tribunal renders the writ petition infructuous or that the Tribunal is the appropriate forum for adjudication of GST matters.