Ms Hi Life Interior vs. State Of Uttarakhand
Held
The Court held that a writ petition is not maintainable when an alternate remedy of appeal is available. The Court noted that the impugned order is appealable under Section 107 of the Uttarakhand GST Act. While the petitioner raised issues regarding the delayed receipt of the order and the subsequent time-barring of an appeal, the Court found that these are matters that can be addressed by the appellate authority. The State counsel indicated that the appellate authority would examine the delay and the potential for condonation. Therefore, the writ petition was dismissed on the ground of alternate remedy, with liberty granted to the petitioner to avail the remedy of appeal.
Facts
The petitioner challenged an order dated 30.5.2023, passed by the Proper Officer under Section 73 of the Uttarakhand GST Act. The petitioner's GST portal was blocked by the department, preventing timely receipt of the order. The petitioner received the order in February 2024 and, due to confusion regarding the appeal remedy in light of a previous judgment (Special Appeal No. 123 of 2022), did not file an appeal within the prescribed time. Consequently, any appeal filed would be time-barred. The State counsel pointed out that the impugned order is appealable under Section 107 of the Uttarakhand GST Act.
Key Issues
1. Whether the writ petition is maintainable before this Court, given the existence of an alternate remedy of appeal under Section 107 of the Uttarakhand GST Act? Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner contended that their GST portal was blocked, leading to delayed receipt of the impugned order. They also cited confusion regarding the appropriate remedy due to a previous judgment, resulting in a time-barred appeal. Therefore, they sought recourse through a writ petition. Revenue/State's Arguments: The State counsel argued that an appeal under Section 107 of the Uttarakhand GST Act is available. They further submitted that the appellate authority would consider the issue of delay and the possibility of condoning it based on the specific facts and circumstances of the case.
Sections Cited
Section 73, Section 107
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
SL. No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS
WPMS 2140/2024 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Mr. Narendra Bali, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Mohit Maulekhi, Brief Holder, for the State. (2) Petitioner has challenged order dated 30.5.2023, passed by the Proper Officer under Section 73 of Uttarakhand GST Act. (3) Learned State Counsel points out that impugned order is appealable under Section 107 of Uttarakhand GST Act. (4) Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, submits that petitioner’s GST Portal was blocked by the department, consequently, she could not receive the impugned order in time and she received it only in the month of February, 2024 and due to confusion regarding remedy of appeal, in view of judgment rendered in Special Appeal No. 123 of 2022, petitioner could not file the appeal in time. Thus he submits that the appeal, if filed by petitioner, would be time-barred. (5) Learned State Counsel, however, submits that the appellate authority will look into the question of delay and also whether delay can b
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 Uttarakhand High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.