M/S Saraf Industries Through Sole Prop Sh Akhil Saraf vs. Assistant Commissioner Division Narela GST Delhi North
Held
The High Court held that the petitioner had an equally efficacious alternate remedy of appeal. Therefore, the court was not inclined to entertain the writ petition directly.
Facts
The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging an order rejecting their refund application under the GST Act. The respondent argued that the order was appealable and the petitioner had not exhausted this remedy.
Key Issues
Whether a writ petition is maintainable when an alternate statutory remedy of appeal is available to the petitioner. Whether the petitioner should be allowed to approach the appellate authority directly despite the delay.
Sections Cited
Section 54
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
O R D E R %
2020
HEARD THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING CM 15626/2020 (Exemption)
Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. W.P. (C) 4338/2020
The present petition has been filed by the petitioner praying inter alia for setting aside an order dated 20.09.2019, passed by the Assistant Commissioner Narela, GST, whereby the application moved by the petitioner for refund under Section 54 of the Central GST Act, 2017, has been rejected.
At the outset, Mr. Harpreet Singh, learned counsel for the respondent states that the openi
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 Delhi High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.