M/S Usha Martin LTD Wire And Wire Ropes vs. State Of Punjab And Ors

Held

The Court noted the statement made by the learned State counsel regarding the contemplation of suo motu revisional proceedings under Section 108 of the Punjab GST/CGST Act, 2017. In light of this development and the categorical stand taken by the State that the impugned GST DRC 07 order dated 03.03.2022 would not be put into operation until the revisional proceedings were taken up and concluded, the Court found no occasion to examine the legality and validity of the impugned order at that stage. The Court did not decide the issues of natural justice or pecuniary jurisdiction. The ratio decidendi is that when the revenue undertakes to review an order and assures it will not be operationalized, the High Court may defer its examination of the challenge. The writ petition was disposed of based on the State's undertaking.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Usha Martin Ltd. Wire & Wire Ropes, challenged an order of GST DRC 07 dated 03.03.2022 (Annexure P-8). The primary grounds for challenge were that the order was passed in violation of principles of natural justice and by an authority lacking pecuniary jurisdiction. The respondents, represented by the Additional Advocate General, Punjab, informed the Court that the matter was under consideration and suo motu revisional proceedings under Section 108 of the Punjab GST/CGST Act, 2017 were contemplated. The State counsel stated that the impugned order would not be put into operation until the revisional proceedings were concluded.

Key Issues

1. Whether the impugned order dated 03.03.2022 (Annexure P-8) was passed in violation of the principles of natural justice, as argued by the petitioner? 2. Whether the authority that passed the impugned order dated 03.03.2022 (Annexure P-8) lacked pecuniary jurisdiction, as argued by the petitioner? The petitioner contended that the order suffered from procedural irregularities, specifically a violation of natural justice and jurisdictional defect. The revenue (State of Punjab and others) did not present arguments on the merits of the challenge. Instead, they informed the Court about contemplated suo motu revisional proceedings under Section 108 of the Punjab GST/CGST Act, 2017 and stated that the impugned order would not be operationalized pending these proceedings.