M/S Sierra Engineering And vs. The State Tax Officer (Intelligence)
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, M/s. Sierra Engineering and Construction (India) Pvt., Ltd., filed a writ petition challenging an order dated July 16, 2022, passed by the State Tax Officer (Intelligence), Roving Squad Team, Trichy. The impugned order imposed a penalty on the petitioner, amounting to Rs. 8,26,956/-, which was paid by the petitioner on the same date. The petitioner sought to quash this order and sought a refund of the penalty paid, contending that the order was illegal and violated principles of natural justice. The writ petition was filed on December 15, 2022.
Held
The Court noted that the petitioner had an effective alternative remedy to challenge the order dated July 16, 2022, by filing an appeal under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner's counsel sought permission to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to pursue this statutory remedy. The Court granted this permission and dismissed the writ petition as withdrawn. The Court further clarified that for the purpose of calculating the limitation period for filing the appeal, the period from the date of filing the writ petition (December 15, 2022) until the date the certified copy of the order is made ready by the Registry would be excluded. No costs were awarded.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner has an effective alternative remedy against the impugned order passed by the Respondent under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017? The Petitioner, represented by its Director, sought to quash the order dated July 16, 2022, and recover the penalty paid. The primary issue before the Court was the maintainability of the writ petition given the existence of an alternative remedy. The Petitioner's counsel, upon being pointed out the alternative remedy, sought to withdraw the writ petition. The Respondent, represented by the Additional Government Pleader, did not present arguments against the withdrawal, implicitly acknowledging the availability of the alternative remedy.
Sections Cited
Section 107
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORDER Heard Mr. K.M.Malarmannan, Learned Counsel for the Petitioner and Mr. M.Senthil Ayyanar, Learned Additional Government Pleader for the Respondent, and perused the materials placed on record, apart from the pleadings of the parties.
When it was pointed out that the Petitioner has got an effective alternative remedy to challenge the proceedings in OR 96/22-23 dated 16.07.2022 passed by the Respondent, which is impugned in this Writ Petition, by filing an appeal under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, Learned Counsel for the Petitioner seeks permission of the Court to withdraw the Writ Petition with liberty to resort to the aforesaid procedure and he has made an endorsement to that effect in the court record. 2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis In view of the same, the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn, granting such liberty. It is made clear that for the purpose of reckoning limitation for availing the aforesaid remedy, the period from the date of filing of the Writ Petition, viz., 15.12.2022, till the date on which the certified copy of this order is made ready by the Registry, shall be excluded. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. No costs. 19.12.2022 Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No pkn Note: (i) Issue order copy by 22.12.2022. (ii) Registry is directed to return the original copy of the impugned order under written acknowledgment after retaining a copy of the same for record. TO: The State Tax Officer (Intelligence), Roving Squad Team, Trichy. 3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis P.D.AUDIKESAVALU,J. pkn
2022 4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Reproduced from the public record of the Madras High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.