M/S Vishwa Printers And Packages PVT.LTD. Lko. Thru. Director Sri Vibhash Nand Gupta vs. Commissioner Goods And Services Tax (GST) Lko. U.P. And Another
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, M/s Vishwa Printers and Packages Pvt. Ltd., had previously filed a writ petition (Writ Tax No. 61 of 2022) challenging certain orders. This Court, on March 29, 2022, disposed of that petition, advising the petitioner to file a statutory appeal under Section 107 of the U.P. Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, or pursue other legal remedies, rather than entertaining the writ petition on grounds of non-service of show cause notice or lack of hearing. The petitioner did not file an appeal. Instead, they made a representation to an unspecified authority, which was dismissed as not maintainable. Subsequently, the petitioner approached the GST Council, which also rejected their representation. The Court inquired about the legal provisions under which these representations were made, but none could be identified by the petitioner's counsel.
Held
The Court held that the present writ petition is not maintainable. This decision is based on the fact that the petitioner had previously approached the Court with a similar challenge, and the Court had disposed of that petition on March 29, 2022, granting liberty to file a statutory appeal under Section 107 of the U.P. Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner failed to avail this liberty. Instead, the petitioner made representations to authorities for which no legal provisions could be pointed out, and these representations were dismissed as not maintainable. The Court reasoned that having been directed to pursue a statutory remedy and failing to do so, the petitioner could not then file a fresh writ petition on the same underlying issue, especially after pursuing unrecognized remedies. The ratio decidendi is that a party cannot bypass statutory remedies explicitly provided and directed by the Court, and then seek extraordinary writ jurisdiction after pursuing unrecognized channels. The Court dismissed the writ petition, reiterating that liberty remains with the petitioner to avail remedies prescribed under law, as permissible.
Key Issues
1. Whether the present writ petition is maintainable given the prior disposal of a similar writ petition and the petitioner's failure to avail the liberty granted to file a statutory appeal under Section 107 of the U.P. Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017. Petitioner's contention: The petitioner implicitly argues for the maintainability of the current writ petition by approaching the Court again, suggesting that the prior disposal did not preclude further recourse, especially after their representations were rejected. They likely believe their subsequent actions were a valid attempt to resolve the issue. Respondent's contention: The respondent, represented by the CSC, would argue that the writ petition is not maintainable because the petitioner failed to follow the Court's previous directions to file a statutory appeal under Section 107 of the U.P. GST Act, 2017. They would also emphasize that the petitioner pursued remedies (representations) for which no legal provisions could be identified, rendering those actions invalid and the current writ petition a misuse of the Court's process.
Sections Cited
Section 107
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:14365-DB Court No. - 2 Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 108 of 2025 Petitioner :- M/S Vishwa Printers And Packages Pvt.Ltd. Lko. Thru. Director Sri Vibhash Nand Gupta Respondent :- Commissioner Goods And Services Tax (Gst) Lko. U.P. And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Onkar Pandey,Arjun Gupta Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Rajan Roy,J. Hon'ble Om Prakash Shukla,J. Heard. The petitioner had earlier approached this Court challenging the same orders which are impugned herein by means of Writ Tax No.- 61 of 2022 (M/S Vishwa Printers And Packages Pvt. Ltd. Thru. Director disposed of on 29.03.2022 in the following terms:- "Without entering into the issue as to whether the show cause notice was served and the petitioner was given opportunity of hearing or not, we are of the considered opinion that the said ground being urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner before us in these proceedings can very well be taken up before the Appellate Authority by preferring appeal under Section 107 of U.P. Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017. We, are thus are not inclined to entertain this writ petition. We hereby dispose of this writ petition with the liberty to the petitioner to file a statutory appeal under Section 107 of U.P. Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 or to take recourse of any other legal remedy available to him. In case any statutory appeal is preferred by the petitioner, the same shall be decided by the Appellate Authority on merit as expeditiously as possible." Undisputedly, the petitioner did not prefer any appeal instead he made
a representation to some authority which has been dismissed as not acceptable/ maintainable. He has then approached the GST Council, which has also rejected the same. On being asked as to under which provisions, such representations were submitted, none could be pointed out. The second writ petition is not maintainable in view of the facts noticed hereinabove, accordingly, it is dismissed. Liberty is already there with the petitioner to avail the remedies as may be prescribed under law as far as it may be permissible. (Om Prakash Shukla,J.) (Rajan Roy,J.) Order Date :- 10.3.2025 Gurpreet Singh GURPREET SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
Reproduced from the public record of the Allahabad High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.