Rohit Garg And Another vs. Union Of INDIA And Others

Facts

The petitioners, Rohit Garg and another, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 20.06.2023 passed by the Principal Commissioner of Central Tax, GST. This order was preceded by a show cause notice dated 08.09.2021. The Commissioner concluded that the petitioners were involved in a racket of issuing bogus bills for MS Scrap by creating a dummy manufacturing unit, M/s Bhartam Industries, Delhi. It was alleged that the petitioners handled all monetary transactions of this firm and fraudulently filed fake returns related to its transactions. After considerable argument, the petitioners' counsel chose not to press the writ petition, acknowledging the availability of an appellate remedy.

Held

The Court noted that the petitioners, after arguing for a considerable time, did not press the writ petition, acknowledging the existence of an appellate remedy. Consequently, the Court disposed of the writ petition. The petitioners were granted liberty to avail their remedy in accordance with law by filing an appropriate application under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963, if permissible, to seek condonation of the period spent before the High Court. The Court did not decide the merits of the case or the allegations made in the show cause notice and the impugned order.

Key Issues

1. Whether the impugned order dated 20.06.2023, passed by the Principal Commissioner of Central Tax, GST, is liable to be quashed on the grounds raised by the petitioners. The petitioners argued that they had a valid remedy of appeal available against the impugned order and, therefore, sought to withdraw the present writ petition to pursue that remedy. They did not press the writ petition on merits. The respondents, Union of India and others, did not present any specific arguments against the petitioners' plea to withdraw, as the petitioners themselves conceded the existence of an alternative remedy.