M/S Agarwal Timber Suppliers vs. State Of Uttarakhand

Held

The Court held that the writ petition was premature. The petitioner had been issued a show-cause notice under Section 129(3) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and the proper course of action was for the petitioner to appear before the Assistant Commissioner, State Tax, Uttarakhand Goods and Service Tax. At that forum, the petitioner could present their stand, including the plea that no offense was committed. The Assistant Commissioner would then deal with the matter in accordance with the law. The Court did not decide on the merits of the alleged contravention of the Act.

Facts

The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging a notice/challan dated 04.07.2019 issued under Section 129(3) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The notice was issued by the Assistant Commissioner, State Tax, Uttarakhand Goods and Service Tax, Squad-A, following the detention of goods allegedly in contravention of the Act. The petitioner sought to challenge this notice before the High Court. The goods in question were detained by the revenue authorities.

Key Issues

1. Whether a writ petition is maintainable against a show-cause notice issued under Section 129(3) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, before the petitioner has availed the statutory remedy of responding to the notice. The petitioner argued that the notice was issued without proper grounds and that no offense had been committed. The petitioner sought to have the notice quashed by the High Court. The revenue authorities contended that the writ petition was premature as the petitioner had not yet responded to the show-cause notice and availed the opportunity to present their case before the Assistant Commissioner.