M/S Agarwal Steel (Proprietorship), Amethi Thru. Proprietor Mr. Devi Prasad Agarwal vs. The Commissioner Goods And Services Tax (GST) U.P. Lko. And Others

Held

The Court held that the statutory remedy of appeal under Section 107 of the U.P. Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, is available against the order under challenge. While acknowledging the petitioner's contention regarding the violation of natural justice, the Court opined that this ground could very well be raised before the Appellate Authority. Therefore, the Court was not inclined to entertain the writ petition. The ratio decidendi is that when a clear and efficacious statutory remedy exists, the High Court, in its writ jurisdiction, should generally relegate the petitioner to that remedy, even if grounds of natural justice violation are raised, as such grounds can be adjudicated by the appellate forum. The Court disposed of the writ petition with liberty to the petitioner to file a statutory appeal or pursue any other available legal remedy. It directed that if a statutory appeal is filed, it shall be decided on merits expeditiously.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Agarwal Steel (Proprietorship), through its Proprietor Mr. Devi Prasad Agarwal, filed a writ petition before the Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench. The petition challenged an order passed by the respondent authorities, including the Commissioner Goods and Services Tax (GST), U.P., Lko. The respondents, represented by the learned Standing Counsel and counsel for respondent No. 1, argued that a statutory remedy of appeal under Section 107 of the U.P. Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, was available against the impugned order. The petitioner contended that the rule of exhaustion of alternative remedies is not absolute, particularly when principles of natural justice have been violated. The respondents countered that natural justice was not violated, as a show cause notice was issued, but the petitioner failed to respond.

Key Issues

1. Whether the writ petition is maintainable before this Court despite the availability of a statutory remedy of appeal under Section 107 of the U.P. Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017? (Question of law) Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner argued that the rule of exhaustion of alternative remedies is not absolute and can be bypassed, especially in cases where principles of natural justice have been violated. The petitioner implied that such a violation had occurred, warranting writ intervention. Respondent's arguments: The respondents contended that the writ petition ought not to be entertained because an effective statutory appeal under Section 107 of the U.P. Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, is available. They further argued that there was no violation of the principles of natural justice, as a show cause notice was issued, and the petitioner failed to respond to it.