Surat Singh Rana vs. Commissioner Central Goods And Services Tax Commissionerate Dehradun

Facts

The petitioner challenged an order dated 20.04.2023, passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Central Goods and Services Tax, Rishikesh, Dehradun. This order confirmed a demand of service tax and issued directions regarding penalty. The petitioner argued that the show cause notice was defective as the service tax demand was based on Income Tax Return details, which they claimed was impermissible. The revenue contended that the petitioner had participated in the proceedings before the GST authorities and should raise this plea in appeal. The Court noted that the impugned order was admittedly appealable.

Held

The Court held that while an alternate efficacious remedy is not an absolute bar to entertaining a writ petition, the petitioner had admittedly participated in the proceedings before the GST authorities, and the impugned order was appealable. The Court acknowledged that a legal plea can be entertained at any stage but emphasized that the petitioner has a definite alternate efficacious remedy. Therefore, the Court was of the view that the writ petition should not be entertained at the admission stage. The Court dismissed the petition in limine, granting the petitioner liberty to raise all available challenges in the statutory appeal.

Key Issues

1. Whether the writ petition is maintainable in view of the availability of an alternate efficacious remedy by way of statutory appeal? The petitioner argued that the show cause notice was per se defective because a demand for service tax cannot be recovered based on details from an Income Tax Return. They contended that this legal plea could be taken at any stage. The respondent revenue argued that the petitioner had participated in the proceedings before the GST authorities, an order had been passed, and this plea should be raised in the statutory appeal.