M/S Kavita Metals vs. Department Of Commercial Taxes

Held

The Court noted that the petitioner's counsel, after arguing at length, was not pressing the writ petitions. The Court acknowledged the petitioner's grievance that they were left remediless because the Goods and Services Tax Tribunal (GST) was not functional. Consequently, the Court disposed of the petitions as 'not pressed' while granting the petitioner liberty to avail the remedy of appeal before the Tribunal. The Court further directed that if the petitioner files an appeal within three months from the date of the Tribunal's constitution, it shall be considered to have been filed within the limitation period. The petitioner was also granted liberty to request early disposal of the appeal, which would be considered in accordance with law. No specific finding was made on the merits of the original grievances, as the petitions were withdrawn.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Kavita Metals, represented by its proprietor Phoowati Choudhary, filed multiple writ petitions before the Rajasthan High Court, Bench at Jaipur. The petitions challenged actions or orders passed by the Department of Commercial Taxes, State of Rajasthan, and the Union of India. The specific tax periods and the exact nature of the orders under challenge are not detailed in the provided text. The procedural history indicates that the learned counsel for the petitioner, after arguing at length, decided not to press the petitions. A significant grievance raised by the petitioner was that they were left remediless due to the Goods and Services Tax Tribunal (GST) not being functional since the implementation of GST in 2017.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner is remediless due to the non-functional status of the Goods and Services Tax Tribunal, thereby preventing them from availing the statutory remedy of appeal? (Question of law, concerning access to justice and statutory remedies). Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the non-operational status of the GST Tribunal has left them without a functional appellate forum, effectively rendering them remediless against the orders passed by the revenue authorities. They sought a remedy from the High Court in this regard. Respondents' Contention: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the respondents (Department of Commercial Taxes, State of Rajasthan, and Union of India) on the issues raised by the petitioner. However, the petitioner ultimately chose not to press the petitions.