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, along with the authority that passed it and the amount in dispute, are not recorded in the judgment. The procedural history is that the petitioner approached the High Court directly via a writ petition.

Held

The Court held that it was not inclined to entertain the present 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 noted the petitioner's submission that they intended to avail this statutory remedy. Consequently, 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 being raised on the ground of limitation. The writ petition was disposed of in terms of this direction.

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. Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner, through its counsel, indicated an intention to avail the statutory remedy of appeal under Section 112 of the Act of 2017. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific argument from the respondents regarding the maintainability of the writ petition. However, the Court's decision implies the existence of the alternative remedy as a ground for not entertaining the writ petition.