Escorts Limited vs. Union Of INDIA And Others
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Escorts 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 judgment does not specify the tax period(s) or the order/action under challenge, nor does it mention the authority that passed it or the amount in dispute. The procedural history is limited to the filing of the writ petition.
Held
The Court held that the writ petition was not maintainable because the petitioner had an alternative remedy of filing an appeal under Section 112 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, which they had admittedly not availed. The Court reasoned that the statutory remedy should be exhausted before approaching the High Court through a writ petition. The petitioner indicated an intention to file the appeal. 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 on the grounds of limitation. The writ petition was disposed of in these terms.
Key Issues
1. Whether the writ petition is maintainable when the petitioner has an alternative statutory remedy of appeal under Section 112 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017? The petitioner argued that they intended to avail the statutory remedy of appeal. The respondents (revenue) did not explicitly argue against the maintainability of the writ petition but relied on the existence of the alternative remedy. The Court's decision hinges on the availability of this alternative remedy.
Sections Cited
Section 112
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
211-3 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CWP-3581-2022 (O&M) Date of Decision: 18th August, 2026. ESCORTS LIMITED
.…...Petitioner(s) V/s UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
......Respondent(s)
CORAM: HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHIT KAPOOR
Present Ms. Priyanka Singla, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. Sourabh Goel, Senior Standing Counsel, UOI/CBIC, with Ms. Himanshi Gautam, Advocate, and Ms. Drishti Saraf, Advocate for the respondents-revenue.
****
ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA, A.C.J. (Oral)
Since the petitioner has an alternative remedy of filing an appeal under Section 112 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (for short, the ‘Act of 2017’), which has admittedly not been availed, we are not inclined to entertain the present writ petition.
At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner(s) submits that the petitioner(s) intends to avail the statutory remedy by filing an appeal under Section 112 of the Act of 2017. 3. In the facts of the case, we direct that in the event the petitioner(s) files the appeal within a period of four weeks from today, the same shall be entertained without any objection being raised on the ground of limitation. SURESH KUMAR 2026.08.21 10:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CWP-3581-2022 (O&M)
Accordingly, the present writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms.
All pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.
[ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA] ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
[ROHIT KAPOOR] JUDGE
August 18, 2026 Ess Kay
Whether speaking / reasoned :
Yes / No Whether Reportable
:
Yes / No SURESH KUMAR 2026.08.21 10:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Reproduced from the public record of the Punjab and Haryana High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.