M/S Rsd Natural Resources PVT LTD And Anr vs. Union Of INDIA And Ors.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s. RSD Natural Resources Private Ltd. & Anr, filed a writ petition challenging an order passed by a GST authority. The petitioner alleged that the full text of the adjudication order was not available on the GST portal, preventing them from filing a statutory appeal. The State, in response, filed an affidavit asserting that the full text of the order was available on the portal before the writ petition was filed and that the petitioner was given an opportunity of hearing. The State also contended that the petitioner had replied to the show-cause notice, which was not initially annexed by the petitioner but was later produced by the State. The petitioner disputed the veracity of the State's evidence regarding portal availability.

Held

The Court held that it could not scrutinize disputed questions of fact, such as the availability of the order on the GST portal and the opportunity of hearing, in its writ jurisdiction. The Court noted that even if the petitioner contended that the show-cause notice was bad, they had replied to it and allowed the proceedings to be adjudicated. The Court found that the petitioner had a statutory remedy of appeal against the adjudication order. The Court was not inclined to entertain the writ petition, dismissing it. However, the Court permitted the petitioner to raise all points before the appellate authority and directed that if the appeal was filed within four weeks, the appellate authority should not raise the issue of limitation. The Court did not expressly leave any issue undecided.

Key Issues

1. Whether the High Court, in its writ jurisdiction, can scrutinize and appreciate disputed questions of fact regarding the availability of the adjudication order on the GST portal and the opportunity of hearing provided to the petitioner, as per Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017? Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that the documents (screenshots) produced by the State to prove the availability of the order on the portal were doubtful and relied on their own screenshots. They also alleged denial of an opportunity of hearing. Revenue/State's contention: The State contended that the full text of the order was available on the portal before the writ petition was filed and that an opportunity of hearing was granted. They further argued that the petitioner had replied to the show-cause notice and allowed the adjudication proceedings to be completed, making the order appealable. The State relied on their affidavit and annexed documents.