Escorts Limited vs. Union Of INDIA And Others

Facts

The petitioner, Escorts Kubota Limited, filed a writ petition before the Punjab and Haryana High Court challenging an order or action by the revenue authorities under the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The specific tax period(s) and the amount in dispute are not recorded in the judgment. The procedural history indicates that the petitioner had not availed the alternative statutory remedy of filing an appeal under Section 112 of the Act of 2017. The revenue was represented by Union of India and others.

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 reasoning was based on the principle that statutory remedies should be exhausted before approaching the High Court under its writ jurisdiction. The ratio decidendi is that writ petitions are generally not maintainable where an equally efficacious alternative remedy exists. The operative direction was to allow the petitioner to file an appeal within four weeks from the date of the order, and such an appeal would be entertained without objection on the ground of limitation.

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's counsel submitted that the petitioner intended to avail the statutory remedy of appeal. The respondents-revenue did not record any specific arguments in the judgment regarding the maintainability of the writ petition, but their presence indicated their opposition to the petition being entertained directly.