Sibri Traders PVT. LTD. vs. State Of U.P. And 2 Others

Facts

Sibri Traders Pvt. Ltd. (the petitioner) filed a writ petition before the Allahabad High Court challenging orders dated August 19, 2021, pertaining to the tax periods July 2017-March 2018 and April 2018-March 2019. The petitioner sought to quash these orders and requested a direction to read down Section 169(2) of the GST Act read with Rule 142 of CGST Rules 2017 to include service of notice via email and registered post for assessees whose GST registration stands cancelled. The State-respondents, through the Standing Counsel, contended that the writ petition was filed suppressing material facts regarding the issue of notice. The petitioner's counsel then sought to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to avail the statutory remedy of appeal under Section 107 of the CGST/UPGST Act, 2017.

Held

The Court did not delve into the merits of the case or decide the substantive issues raised by the petitioner. Instead, the Court noted the petitioner's request to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to pursue the statutory remedy of appeal under Section 107 of the CGST/UPGST Act, 2017. The Court accepted this request and accordingly dismissed the writ petition as withdrawn. No specific finding was given on the validity of the impugned orders or the interpretation of Section 169(2) and Rule 142. The Court's decision was based on the petitioner's withdrawal and the liberty granted to pursue alternative remedies. The operative direction was the dismissal of the writ petition as withdrawn, with liberty to file an appeal.

Key Issues

1. Whether the impugned orders dated 19.08.2021 for the periods July 2017-March 2018 and April 2018-March 2019 are liable to be quashed? (Question of law) 2. Whether Section 169(2) of the GST Act read with Rule 142 of CGST Rules 2017 should be read down to incorporate service of notice via emails and registered post in case of assessees whose GST registration stands cancelled? (Question of law) Petitioner's contentions: The petitioner sought to quash the impugned orders and requested a mandamus to read down Section 169(2) of the GST Act and Rule 142 of CGST Rules 2017 to permit service of notice via email and registered post for cancelled GST registrations. The petitioner later sought to withdraw the petition to avail statutory appeal remedies. Respondent's contentions: The State-respondents argued that the writ petition was filed suppressing material facts concerning the issue of notice.