M/S Nayan Enterprises Through One Of Its Partners Raju Kumar Mandal vs. Commissioner Of State Tax State Of Jharkhand Jharkhand Goods And Service Tax
Held
The Court held that while an alternative remedy exists, the circumstances presented by the petitioner warranted consideration. The Court noted that the cancellation and subsequent revocation of the petitioner's GST registration caused a delay, depriving them of the opportunity to file a reply to the show cause notice and an appeal against the final order. Therefore, the Court disposed of the writ petition by granting liberty to the petitioner to file an application for condonation of delay before the appropriate forum. The appropriate forum is directed to consider this application in accordance with the law. The Court did not decide on the merits of the original GST proceedings or the validity of the delay condonation itself.
Facts
The petitioner, M/s Nayan Enterprises, filed a writ petition challenging a show cause notice dated 05.03.2022, a summary of show cause notice in FORM GST DRC-01 dated 05.03.2022, and a summary of order in FORM GST DRC-07 dated 07.04.2022, issued under Section 74 of the Jharkhand Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, for the period April 2018 to March 2019. The petitioner's GST registration was cancelled on 29.05.2022, effective from 31.03.2022. Following the revocation of this cancellation on 04.07.2023, the petitioner became aware of the impugned notices and order. This delay prevented the petitioner from filing a reply to the show cause notice and an appeal against the final order.
Key Issues
1. Whether the High Court should entertain a writ petition when an alternative statutory remedy of appeal is available, despite the petitioner's contention of delay in filing the appeal? Petitioner's argument: The petitioner argued that there was a delay in preferring an appeal against the summary of order and, having no other remedy, approached the High Court for condonation of delay. Respondents' argument: The respondents contended that if there was a delay in preferring an appeal, the petitioner should have filed an application for condonation of delay before the appropriate forum instead of seeking extraordinary jurisdiction from the High Court.
Sections Cited
Section 74
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P. (T) No. 4196 of 2023 M/s Nayan Enterprises, a partnership firm, through one of its partners Raju Kumar Mandal
... ... ... ... ... Petitioner
Versus
Commissioner of State Tax, State of Jharkhand, Jharkhand Goods and Service Tax, Ranchi
Deputy Commissioner of State Tax, Jharkhand Goods and Service Tax, Godda and Dumka, Godda.
State Tax Officer, Jharkhand Goods and Service Tax, Godda and Dumka, Godda
… … ... Respondents
--------- CORAM:
HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD
--------- For the Petitioner: Mr. Deepak Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the Respondents: Mr. Gaurav Raj, A.C. to A.A.G-II
--------- Order No.5 /Dated: 09.07.2024
Heard Mr. Deepak Kumar Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Gaurav Raj, learned A.C. to learned A.A.G.-II for Respondent-State.
The petitioner files this writ application against the show cause notice dated 05.03.2022, summary of show cause notice in FORM GST DRC-01 dated 05.03.2022 and summary of order in F
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Jharkhand High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.