M/S Kedar Enterprises vs. Commissioner , State Goods And Service Tax

Held

The Court noted that the learned State Counsel informed the Court that the order impugned in the writ petition is appealable before the First Appellate Authority under Section 107 of the Goods and Services Tax (GST) Act, 2017. In light of this information, the learned counsel for the petitioner sought permission to withdraw the petition with liberty to avail the appropriate remedy under the GST Act, 2017. The Court accordingly dismissed the writ petition with the liberty granted to the petitioner. The primary finding was that a statutory remedy existed, making the writ petition premature or not the appropriate forum.

Facts

The petitioner, represented by Mr. Pooran Lal, challenged an order dated 13.09.2023 passed by the Deputy Commissioner State Tax, Haldwani. This order imposed a penalty of Rs. 25,000/- under CGST and Rs. 25,000/- under SGST on the petitioner. The reason for the penalty was the failure to file the monthly CGST and SGST returns within the prescribed time. The State of Uttarakhand was represented by Mr. Mohit Maulekhi, learned Brief Holder. The proceedings were before the Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J. of the High Court of Uttarakhand.

Key Issues

1. Whether the writ petition is maintainable before this Court when an alternative statutory remedy of appeal is available under the Goods and Services Tax (GST) Act, 2017? The petitioner argued that the writ petition was filed to challenge the order imposing penalty. The revenue, through the learned State Counsel, contended that the impugned order dated 13.09.2023 is appealable before the First Appellate Authority under Section 107 of the GST Act, 2017. The petitioner, upon being informed of this, sought permission to withdraw the petition to avail the appropriate statutory remedy.