M/S Ranjan Ray vs. The Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes And Goods And Services Tax

2026

The petitioner, a Proprietorship concern carrying on its business in execution of works contract in the name and style M/s. Ranjan Ray, was assigned with GSTIN No.21BNCPR7076R1ZB under the GST Act. As it could not file its returns in prescribed time, the registration was cancelled on 10th January, 2019. Thereafter, the petitioner applied for and granted a fresh registration assigned with GSTIN No.21BNCPR7076R2ZA.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that while the matter stood thus, the State Tax Officer, CT & GST Circle, Koraput, Jeypore-opposite party no.3, treating the petitioner as not registered person, issued show cause notice under Section 63 of the GST Act claiming that he has neither disclosed the amount received towards supply of works contract service nor discharged the tax liability for the period 2019-20 and vide order dated 8th August, 2025 under Section 63 of the GST Act, the opposite party no.3 raised a total of demand of Rs.51,62,786 (Tax=Rs.26,42,496/- + Interest=Rs.25,20,290/-) against the petitioner.

Therefore, the petitioner filed an application for rectification before the said authority, which was rejected vide order dated 28th February, 2026. He submitted that the matter did not rest thereat, but challenging the same, the petitioner by way of an appeal approached before the Joint Commissioner of State Tax (Appeal), Territorial Range, Koraput, Jeypore-opposite party no.3, which was rejected vide order dated 7th May, 2026. 3. 3. Being aggrieved thereby, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of filing this writ petition invoking provisions under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.

He submitted that without giving notice and opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, the opposite party no.2 vide order dated 8th August, 2025 raised the demand in favour of the petitioner, which are arbitrary, whimsical, illegal, erroneous and violative of principles of natural justice. Therefore, he prayed for the same are liable to be set aside and, accordingly, prayed for grant of relief by allowing the writ petition.

Per contra, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the CT & GST Organization vehemently opposing the contentions so advanced by the learned counsel for setting aside the

He submitted that the petitioner is required to discharge statutory obligation as envisaged under aforesaid section for filing appeal before the GST Appellate Tribunal. The learned Standing Counsel submitted that at present the GST Appellate Tribunal has been constituted and started functioning.

It is brought to the notice of this Court that the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue) has issued Notification bearing F.No.A-50/7/2025-GSTAT-DoR (S.O.3502(E)), dated 30th June, 2026 published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary No.3367, dated 30th June, 2026, which reads as follows: “In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) read with sub-section (3) of section 112 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (12 of 2017) and in supersession of the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue number S.O. 4220(E), dated the 17 September, 2025, published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part II, Section 3, Sub-section (ii), except as respects things done or omitted to be done before such supersession, the Government, on the recommendations of the Council, hereby notifies the 31st day of July, 2026, as the date upto which appeal or application, as the case may be, may be filed

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel appearing for the CT & GST Department.

Considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties. It is no longer res integra that the Writ Court can be approached assailing an order for which the forum of appeal is provided and the same is entertainable in the event the forum is not made functional or constituted as the person cannot be rendered remediless. Equally it is true that if conditions are attached to filing an appeal before such forum, the Writ Court shall ensure strict compliance thereof as a person cannot steal a march taking a shelter that there is no inhibition in the writ Court in entertaining

This Court felt it apt to have reference to the following view expressed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Leelavathi N. Vrs. State of Karnataka, (2025) 10 SCR 846:

In the similar tone, it can be said a dedicated chapter, being Chapter-XVIII of the GST Act deals with Appeals and Revision. Section 112 of the GST Act provides the manner to approach the GST Appellate Tribunal to agitate grievance against the appellate orders. What emerges from the provisions of said Chapter is that the GST Act is equipped with all the powers to effectively and holistically deal with a matter presented before it and do complete

The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Radha Krishan Industries Vrs. State of Himachal Pradesh, (2021) 3 SCR 406, held, inter alia, that where an effective alternative remedy is available to the aggrieved person, the High Court ought to restrain itself from exercising power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and when a right is created by statute, which itself prescribes the remedy or procedure for enforcing the right or liability, resort must be had to that particular statutory remedy before invoking the discretionary remedy under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. It is made clear that this rule of exhaustion of statutory remedies is a rule of policy, convenience and discretion.

This Court finds force in the submission of Sri Sunil Mishra, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the CT & GST Organization that the petitioner has alternative remedy to challenge the appellate order whereby the assessment order has been affirmed. Keeping in view the tenet for entertainment of writ petition challenging the assessment order laid down in Commissioner of Income Tax Vrs. Chhabil Dass Agrawal, (2014) 1 SCC 603 and Godrej Sara Lee Ltd. Vrs. Excise and Taxation Officer-cum-Assessing

In the result, the writ petition being not entertained, liberty is reserved to the petitioner, if so advised, to approach the appropriate authority/forum to ventilate its grievance in accordance with law and all questions, law as also facts, can be raised before the said authority/forum. As a result of disposal of the writ petition, all pending Interlocutory Application (s), shall stand disposed of.