M/S Sree Narayan Construction vs. The State Of Bihar
Facts
The petitioner, M/s Sree Narayan Construction, filed a writ petition before the Patna High Court challenging two orders: one dated 14.02.2020 passed by the Joint Commissioner, State Taxes, Begusarai Circle (respondent no. 2), and another dated 31.09.2024 passed by the Additional Commissioner (Appeal), State Taxes, Patna West Commissary (respondent no. 3). The petition also sought to set aside a demand notice dated 14.02.2020 issued by respondent no. 3 and to restrain the respondents from recovering the tax amount from the petitioner. The petitioner was represented by Mrs. Archana Sinha, Sr. Advocate, and Mr. Alok Kumar, Advocate, while the State was represented by Mr. Rajeev Kumar Singh, GA-10.
Held
The Court granted liberty to the petitioner to challenge the order dated 28.09.2024, passed by the learned Additional Commissioner (Appeal) State Tax, Patna West Division, Patna, by approaching the learned Tribunal under Section 112 of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. Consequently, the present writ petition stands disposed of. The specific findings on the validity of the orders dated 14.02.2020 and 31.09.2024, the demand notice, and the recovery of tax are not addressed as the petitioner was granted liberty to pursue the appellate remedy. The ratio decidendi is that statutory appellate remedies should be exhausted before approaching the High Court under writ jurisdiction, particularly when specific liberty is granted to do so.
Key Issues
1. Whether the order dated 14.02.2020 passed by the Joint Commissioner, State Taxes, Begusarai Circle, is liable to be set aside? 2. Whether the order dated 31.09.2024 passed by the Additional Commissioner (Appeal), State Taxes, Patna West Commissary, is liable to be set aside? 3. Whether the demand notice dated 14.02.2020 issued by the Additional Commissioner (Appeal), State Taxes, Patna West Commissary, is liable to be set aside? 4. Whether the respondents should be restrained from recovering the tax amount from the petitioner until the disposal of the writ petition? The petitioner argued for the setting aside of the impugned orders and the demand notice, and for a stay on recovery. The State's arguments are not recorded in the judgment.
Sections Cited
Section 112
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH) 13 06-10-2026 The present writ p
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 Patna High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.