M/S Jagat Jeet Engineers vs. Superintendent Central Goods And Services Tax

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Jagat Jeet Engineers, filed a writ petition before the High Court challenging an order dated 18.7.2018 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad. The respondent, Superintendent Central Goods And Services Tax, raised an objection regarding the maintainability of the writ petition, citing the availability of an alternative remedy of appeal under Section 35(g)(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The petitioner, acknowledging this, expressed their intention to avail the alternative remedy.

Held

The Court did not decide the substantive issues of the case. The respondent raised a preliminary objection regarding the maintainability of the writ petition due to the availability of an alternative appellate remedy under Section 35(g)(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The petitioner's counsel conceded to this point and stated that they wished to withdraw the present petition to avail the statutory remedy. Consequently, the Court dismissed the writ petition as not pressed, granting the petitioner liberty to pursue the alternative remedy. No specific findings were made on the merits of the original challenge before the Tribunal.

Key Issues

1. Whether the writ petition is maintainable before this Court, given the existence of an alternative statutory remedy of appeal under Section 35(g)(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944? Petitioner's contention: The petitioner did not argue on the maintainability of the writ petition. Instead, they indicated their intention to withdraw the petition to pursue the alternative remedy. Respondent's contention: The respondent argued that the writ petition is not maintainable as an alternative remedy of appeal is available to the petitioner under Section 35(g)(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944.