Sodhani Sweets Private Limited vs. Joint Commissioner Circle-A
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Sodhani Sweets Private Limited, filed a writ petition before the Rajasthan High Court at Jaipur challenging an order dated 29.12.2023 passed by the Joint Commissioner, Enforcement Wing Rajasthan-I, Jaipur. The petitioner contended that samosa and kachori were taxed at 18%, which was beyond the Authority's jurisdiction and contrary to GST Council orders. The respondents raised a preliminary objection, arguing that the petitioner had an alternative remedy before the First Appellate Authority, with a further appeal to the Second Appellate Authority. They stated the fees for the first appeal were Rs. 3,20,000/- and that the writ petition did not fall under the exceptions laid down by the Supreme Court in Godrej Sara Lee Ltd. v. Excise and Taxation Officer-cum-Assessing Authority.
Held
The Court held that the writ petition was not maintainable in the present case. The primary reasoning was that the petitioner had an effective alternative statutory remedy available before the First Appellate Authority. The Court found that the objections raised by the petitioner before the High Court could be effectively raised and adjudicated before the First Appellate Authority. Therefore, the Court declined to entertain the matter under its writ jurisdiction. The Court dismissed the writ petition, explicitly leaving it open for the petitioner to pursue the alternative remedy of appeal. As a measure of relief, the Court directed that the period during which the writ petition remained pending before the High Court would not be counted towards the limitation period for filing the appeal. The Appellate Authority was further directed to decide any appeal filed expeditiously.
Key Issues
1. Whether the writ petition is maintainable before the High Court, or if the petitioner has an alternative statutory remedy available before the First Appellate Authority? (Question of law) Petitioner's Contentions: The petitioner argued that the order passed by the Authority was beyond its jurisdiction and contrary to the orders of the GST Council, implying that the statutory remedy might not be adequate or applicable in such circumstances. Respondents' Contentions: The respondents contended that the order could be challenged before the First Appellate Authority, and subsequently before the Second Appellate Authority. They argued that the fees for the first appeal (Rs. 3,20,000/-) were not prohibitive and that the writ petition did not meet the criteria for entertainment under writ jurisdiction as per the Apex Court's ruling in Godrej Sara Lee Ltd. v. Excise and Taxation Officer-cum-Assessing Authority. They relied on a previous judgment of the same High Court in Tanushree Logistics Private Limited v. State of Rajasthan & Others.
Sections Cited
Not specified in the judgment
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
Order 14/03/2024
The petitioner has preferred this writ petition aggrieved by order dated 29.12.2023. 2. A preliminary objection was raised by learned counsel for the respondents that the order can be challenged before First Appellate Authority and if the order stands, the petitioner has further remedy of filing appeal before the Second Appellate Authority. It is also contended that fees payable for filing an appeal before the First Appellate Authority is just Rs.3,20,000/- and it cannot be said that
[2024:RJ-JP:12841-DB] (2 of 2) [CW-3668/2024] rights of the petitioner are being taken away. It is also contended that the writ petition is not covered under the clauses laid down by the Apex Court in Godrej Sara Lee Ltd. Versus Excise and Taxation Officer-cum-Assessing Authority and Others: 2023 SCC OnLine SC
Learned counsel for the respondents has placed reliance on the judgment of this High Court in the case of Tanushree Logistics Private Limited Versus State of Rajasthan & Others: D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.17550/2022 and batch of writ petitions.
Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that samosa and kachori have been taxed @ 18%. The said order passed by the Authority is beyond its juri iction and against the orders passed by the GST Council.
We have considered the contentions.
Be that as it may, appropriate authority in the present case is the First Appellate Authority. We do not find it a fit case to entertain in the writ juri iction as whatever objection the petitioner is raising before this Court can be raised before the First Appellate Authority.
The writ petition is accordingly dismissed, leaving it open for the petitioner to avail alternative remedy of appeal. We further direct that the period during which this petition remained pending before this Court shall not be counted for the purpose of counting the period of limitation in filing appeal. In case an appeal is filed, the Appellate Authority is directed to decide the same expeditiously in accordance with law. (SHUBHA MEHTA),J (PANKAJ BHANDARI),J Karan/12
Reproduced from the public record of the Rajasthan High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.