M/S Cipel Partnership Firm Thru. Its Partner Parvez Khan Lko. vs. Chief Commissioner Goods And Services Tax (GST) Central Excise Lko. Zone And Another

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Cipel Partnership Firm, through its Partner Parvez Khan, filed a writ petition before the High Court challenging an order passed by the respondent authorities. The respondents, represented by the Chief Commissioner Goods and Services Tax (GST) Central Excise Lko. Zone and another, argued that a statutory remedy of appeal under Section 107 of the U.P. Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, was available to the petitioner. The petitioner contended that the rule of exhaustion of alternative remedies is not absolute and that the writ petition could be entertained due to alleged violations of natural justice. The respondents countered that natural justice principles were not violated, as a show cause notice was issued and the petitioner had responded.

Held

The Court held that while the petitioner raised grounds concerning the violation of natural justice, these grounds could be effectively addressed before the Appellate Authority by filing an appeal under Section 107 of the U.P. Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017. The Court explicitly stated that it was not inclined to entertain the writ petition. The reasoning was that the availability of a statutory appeal provided a proper forum for adjudicating the petitioner's grievances, including those related to the issuance of the show cause notice and the opportunity for a personal hearing. The Court did not decide on the merits of the petitioner's claim regarding natural justice violations, leaving that to the appellate authority. The operative direction was to dispose of the writ petition with liberty to the petitioner to file a statutory appeal.

Key Issues

1. Whether the writ petition is maintainable in the presence of an alternative statutory remedy of appeal under Section 107 of the U.P. Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017? The petitioner argued that the rule of exhaustion of alternative remedies is not absolute and that writ petitions can be entertained in cases of violation of natural justice principles, even if a statutory appeal is available. The respondents contended that the writ petition ought not to be entertained because a statutory appeal under Section 107 of the U.P. Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, is available. They further argued that the case did not involve a violation of natural justice, as a show cause notice was issued and the petitioner had responded to it.