Ms Vijay Fit And Forge Private LTD vs. State Of Uttarakhand
Facts
The petitioner, M/s Vijay Fit & Forge Private Ltd., filed a writ petition challenging a notice dated 18.10.2023 and a penalty order dated 20.10.2023 passed by the State Tax Officer (respondent no.3). These orders pertained to the detention of a vehicle carrying goods. The petitioner contended that they had already paid the tax and the penalty imposed, amounting to Rs.1,25,056/-, and sought a refund of this amount. The State, represented by learned counsel, raised a preliminary objection regarding the maintainability of the writ petition.
Held
The Court held that the orders impugned in the writ petition are appealable under Section 107 of The Uttarakhand Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The Court found no doubt that the petitioner could file an appeal before the appellate authority. Therefore, the writ petition was disposed of on the preliminary objection raised by the State. The Court directed that it is open to the petitioner to raise all the points that were raised in the writ petition before the appellate authority. The Court did not decide on the merits of the petitioner's claim for refund or the validity of the penalty order itself, as the matter was relegated to the appellate forum.
Key Issues
1. Whether the impugned notice dated 18.10.2023 and penalty order dated 20.10.2023, passed by the State Tax Officer, are appealable under the Uttarakhand Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, thereby precluding the petitioner from approaching the High Court by way of a writ petition. Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that they had already paid the tax and penalty and were seeking a refund, implying that the matter was resolved by payment and thus not strictly an appealable order in the traditional sense. They sought direct relief from the High Court. Revenue/State's contention: The State contended that the orders impugned in the writ petition were appealable under Section 107 of the Uttarakhand Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and that the petitioner ought to pursue the statutory appellate remedy before the Joint Commissioner GST.
Sections Cited
Section 107
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
2024:UHC:7680
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (M/S) No.1091 of 2024
M/s Vijay Fit & Forge Private Ltd. --Petitioner
Versus
State of Uttarakhand & others
--Respondents
Presence:-
Ms. Swaleha Hussain and Ms. Monika Singh, learned
counsel for the petitioner.
Mr. Tarun Lakhera, learned Brief Holder for the State/respondents.
Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J.
By means of this writ petition the petitioner has challenged the impugned notice dated 18.10.2023 Annexure 3 to the writ petition as well as penalty order dated 20.10.2023 passed by respondent no.3-State Tax Officer whereby the vehicle containing goods was detained by the State Tax Officer and after issuing show cause notice.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has already paid tax as well as the penalty imposed by respondent no.3 and, therefore, the petitioner wants the refund of amount i.e. Rs.1,25,056/-.
Learned counsel appearing for the State raised a preliminary objection in the matter and submitted that orders impugned in the present writ pet
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 Uttarakhand High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.