M/S Jindal Aluminium Limited vs. Union Of INDIA
Held
The High Court held that writ jurisdiction should be exercised only in exceptional cases. In the present matter, a tax liability of Rs. 14,31,038/- was established, and a clear statutory remedy of appeal under Section 107 of the CGST Act was available to the petitioner. The Court found no exceptional circumstances to warrant entertaining the writ petition. Therefore, the Court was not inclined to entertain the Civil Writ Petition. The Appellate Authority was directed to consider the application for condonation of delay, taking into account the fact that the writ petition was filed.
Facts
M/s Jindal Aluminium Limited (the petitioner) filed a Civil Writ Petition before the High Court of Rajasthan, Jaipur Bench, challenging an order dated April 5, 2024. This order established a tax liability of Rs. 14,31,038/- against the petitioner. The petitioner contended that the authorities acted contrary to law, making writ jurisdiction maintainable. The respondents, Union of India (CGST) and the State of Rajasthan, opposed the petition, arguing that an appeal under Section 107 of the CGST Act was available against the impugned order. The High Court considered the contentions of both parties.
Key Issues
1. Whether the writ jurisdiction of the High Court is maintainable in a case where a statutory appeal is provided under Section 107 of the CGST Act, especially when a significant tax liability is involved? Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that the authorities acted contrary to the provisions of law, which justifies the exercise of writ jurisdiction. They relied on the Supreme Court decision in M/s Godrej Sara Lee Ltd. Vs. The Excise & Taxation Officer-Cum-Assessing Authority & Ors. (2023 SCC OnLine SC 95). Respondents' contention: The respondents (CGST and State of Rajasthan) contended that a statutory appeal under Section 107 of the CGST Act is the appropriate remedy against the impugned order. They relied on the Supreme Court decision in M/s South Indian Bank Ltd. & Ors. Vs. Naveen Mathew Philip & Anr. (2023 SCC Online SC 435).
Sections Cited
Section 107
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
[2024:RJ-JP:36343-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10665/2024 M/s Jindal Aluminium Limited, Having Its Registered Office At Tumkur Road, Bangalore Karnataka -560073 And Factory At SP - 2/333, RIICO Industrial Area, Bhiwadi, Rajasthan-301019 Through Its Authorized Representative Sh. Sangeet Kant. ----Petitioner Versus
Union of India, Through Superintendent, Central Goods And Service Tax, Range-XIII, Dhaba Complex, Bhiwadi (Raj.) - 301019. 2. State of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Department of Finance, Government of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat, Janpath, Jaipur- 302005. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Javed Khan For Respondent No.1 For Respondent No.2 : : Mr. Chandra Shekhar Sinha, Sr. Standing Counsel for CGST Mr. Sandeep Taneja, AAG along with Ms. Kinjal Surana HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI Order 30/08/2024
Petitioner has preferred this Civil Writ Petition inter alia challenging the order dated 05.04.2024, whereby the tax liability of Rs.14,31,038/- has been established against the petitioner.
It is contended by counsel appearing for the petitioner t
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Rajasthan High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.