Chimera Infrastructure Private Limited vs. Assistant Commissioner CGST Commissionerate And 2 Others
Held
The Court sustained the preliminary objection raised by the revenue regarding the maintainability of the writ petition. The Court reasoned that since the petitioner had availed the statutory remedy under Rule 86A(2) of the CGST Rules, 2017, the writ petition was not the appropriate forum. The Court disposed of the writ petition with a direction that upon the petitioner filing a copy of the High Court's order before respondent no.1 (presumably the appellate authority or the authority dealing with the Rule 86A(2) application), their application filed under Rule 86A(2) should be dealt with and decided expeditiously, preferably within two weeks from the date of compliance by the petitioner. No other issues were decided.
Facts
The petitioner, Chimera Infrastructure Private Limited, filed a writ petition before the Allahabad High Court challenging an order dated 03.08.2026, passed by respondent no.2, the Assistant Commissioner CGST Commissionerate. The petitioner had previously availed a statutory remedy under Rule 86A(2) of the CGST Rules, 2017, concerning this order. The revenue raised a preliminary objection regarding the maintainability of the writ petition due to the availability of the statutory remedy.
Key Issues
1. Whether the writ petition is maintainable when the petitioner has already availed a statutory remedy under Rule 86A(2) of the CGST Rules, 2017? The petitioner contended that the writ petition should be entertained. The revenue argued that the writ petition is not maintainable as the petitioner has already invoked the statutory remedy available under Rule 86A(2) of the CGST Rules, 2017, against the impugned order.
Sections Cited
Rule 86A(2)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT TAX No. - 3683 of 2026 Court No. - 39 HON'BLE SAUMITRA DAYAL SINGH, J. HON'BLE SWARUPAMA CHATURVEDI, J.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, it appears, the petitioner has availed statutory remedy under Rule 86A(2) of the CGST Rules, 2017, with respect to order dated 03.08.2026, passed by respondent no.2. 2. To the extent, the petitioner has availed statutory remedy against the impugned order, preliminary objection raised as to the maintainability of the writ petition, is sustained.
Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with the observation, subject to the petitioner filing a copy of this order before the respondent no.1, his application filed under Rule 86A(2) of the Rules may be dealt with and decided, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of two weeks from the date of compliance shown by the petitioner. September 8, 2026 Prakhar Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ajay Kumar Yadav, Ashish Bansal, Shalini Goel Counsel for Respondent(s) : Dhananjay Awasthi (Swarupama Chaturvedi,J.) (Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.) Chimera Infrastructure Private Limited .....Petit
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 Allahabad High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.