Escorts Kubota Limited vs. Union Of INDIA And Others

Facts

The petitioner, Escorts Kubota Limited, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh. The respondents were the Union of India and others. The specific tax period and the order or action under challenge, as well as the authority that passed it, are not recorded in the judgment. The amount in dispute is also not stated. The procedural history is that the petitioner approached the High Court via a writ petition, which is the subject of this judgment.

Held

The Court held that it was not inclined to entertain the writ petition because the petitioner had an alternative remedy of filing an appeal under Section 112 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, which had admittedly not been availed. The Court reasoned that the existence of an effective alternative remedy is a ground for declining to exercise writ jurisdiction. The petitioner's counsel then submitted that the petitioner intended to avail the statutory remedy. Accordingly, the Court directed that if the petitioner files the appeal within four weeks from the date of the order, it shall be entertained without any objection on the ground of limitation. The Court did not decide any substantive GST law issue.

Key Issues

1. Whether the High Court should entertain a writ petition when an alternative statutory remedy of appeal under Section 112 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, is available and has not been availed by the petitioner? The petitioner argued that they intended to avail the statutory remedy. The revenue's argument is not recorded, but the court's decision implies the revenue would have raised the alternative remedy as a bar to the writ petition.