Innovators Cleantech vs. Excise And Taxation Officer
Held
The High Court held that the writ petition was not maintainable. The Court reasoned that an efficacious statutory remedy, namely the right to file an appeal under Section 107 of the Haryana Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017/Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, was available to the petitioner. The Court granted liberty to the petitioner to avail this statutory remedy. The ratio decidendi is that High Courts should generally relegate parties to the statutory appellate mechanism when such a remedy is available and adequate, unless there are exceptional circumstances warranting interference under Article 226 of the Constitution, which were not demonstrated here. The operative direction was to dismiss the writ petition and permit the petitioner to file an appeal.
Facts
The petitioner, M/s RS Cleantech Pvt. Ltd., has impugned an order passed under Section 73 read with Section 50 of the Haryana Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017/Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner filed a writ petition before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana challenging this order. The respondents are the Taxation Officer and others. The order under challenge pertains to the Goods and Services Tax. The petitioner sought relief from the High Court directly through the writ petition.
Key Issues
1. Whether the writ petition is maintainable when an alternate statutory remedy of appeal under Section 107 of the Haryana Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017/Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 is available to the petitioner? (Question of law) Petitioner's contention: The petitioner, through their counsel, argued that the writ petition should be entertained. However, the specific grounds or arguments for bypassing the statutory remedy were not explicitly recorded in the judgment. Revenue's contention: The respondents, through their counsel, implicitly argued for the dismissal of the writ petition on the grounds of alternative statutory remedy. The judgment notes that the writ petition was dismissed on the ground of efficacious statutory remedy available to the petitioner.
Sections Cited
Section 73, Section 50, Section 107
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
126 I
INNOVATOR
EXCISE AND CORAM: H
H
Present: M M
SANJEEV P
A 50 of the Ha Services Tax appealable in 2. G arguments the efficacious sta
A
2024 rajesh 1 2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUN AT CHANDIGA C D RS CLEANTECH PVT. LTd.
Vs. D TAXATION OFFICER & OR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SAN HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SAN Mr. Sushil Kumar, Advocate (thr Mr. Shivam Grover, Advocate fo *** RAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral) Admittedly the order passed und aryana Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, has been impugned terms of Section 107 of the Act. Granting liberty to the petitione erein, the writ petition is dismi atutory remedy available to the p All pending misc. application(s)
(SANJ (
Whether speaking/reasoned?
Whether reportable?
NJAB AND HARYANA ARH CWP-28320-2024 (O&M) Date of Decision: 19.10.2024
…Petitioner RS.
…Respondents NJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA NJAY VASHISTH rough video conferencing) with or the petitioner. ) der Section 73 read with Section x Act, 2017/Central Goods and in the present petition, which is . er to file an appeal and raise all ssed on the ground of alternate petitioner. also stand disposed of.
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
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.