M/S Kamakhya And Sons vs. State Of U.P. And 2 Others
Facts
The petitioner, M/s Kamakhya And Sons, filed a writ petition before the High Court seeking to quash an order dated 22.12.2020 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Commercial Tax, Sector-13, Varanasi. The respondent was the State of U.P. and two others. The court noted that the petitioner had a statutory remedy of appeal under Section 107 of the U.P. Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, against the order passed by the adjudicating authority. The petitioner did not dispute the existence of this remedy. The matter was taken up through video conferencing.
Held
The Court held that it was not inclined to grant indulgence in the present writ petition. The reasoning was based on the undisputed fact that the petitioner had a clear and available remedy of appeal under Section 107 of the U.P. Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, against the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner. This section mandates that any person aggrieved by a decision or order passed by an adjudicating authority may appeal to the prescribed Appellate Authority within three months from the communication of the order. The ratio decidendi is that writ jurisdiction is an extraordinary remedy and should not be exercised when an adequate alternative remedy exists. The operative direction was to dismiss the petition with liberty to the petitioner to avail the remedy of appeal. The Appellate Authority was directed to decide the appeal on merit if preferred within 30 days from the date of the order.
Key Issues
1. Whether the High Court should entertain a writ petition when an alternative statutory remedy of appeal is available to the petitioner under Section 107 of the U.P. Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017? The petitioner's contention, implied by filing the writ petition, is that the High Court should intervene. The respondent's position, as indicated by the court's observation, is that the statutory remedy is available and should be availed. The court's decision hinges on whether to exercise its writ jurisdiction in the presence of a clear appellate mechanism.
Sections Cited
Section 107
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Court No. - 9 Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 278 of 2021 Petitioner :- M/S Kamakhya And Sons Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Aloke Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Sanjay Yadav,Acting Chief Justice Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J.
Matter is taken up through video conferencing.
The petitioner by way of present petition seeks quashment of order dated 22.12.2020 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Commercial Tax, Sector-13, Varanasi.
It being not disputed that against this order the petitioner has remedy of appeal under Section 107 of the U.P. Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, which mandates :- "[107]. Appeals to Appellate Authority.- (1) Any person aggrieved by any decision or order passed under this Act or the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (12 of 2017) by an adjudicating authority may appeal to such Appellate Authority as may be prescribed within three months from the date on which the said decision or order is communicated to such person."
In view whereof, we are not inclined to cause any indulgence.
The petition stands dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to avail remedy of appeal.
In case an appeal is preferred within 30 days from
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 Allahabad High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.