Ms Dada Motors Privatelimited vs. Uniion Terriotory Of Chandigarh And Others

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Dada Motors Pvt. Ltd., filed a writ petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India challenging an order dated 01.12.2023 passed under Section 73 of the Central Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017, along with an order in Form GST DRC-07. The petitioner stated that the assessed amount was due for deposit by 01.01.2024 and that the requisite appeal had been filed along with the pre-deposit. The respondents were the Union Territory of Chandigarh and others.

Held

The Court held that since the petitioner had availed the alternate remedy by filing an appeal along with the pre-deposit, the writ petition had become infructuous concerning the challenge to the order dated 01.12.2023. The Court did not delve into the merits of the GST order itself. The reasoning was based on the principle that once an alternative statutory remedy is pursued and utilized, a writ petition challenging the same order becomes redundant. The operative direction was to dispose of the writ petition as infructuous, leaving it open for the petitioner to raise other questions in the appropriate proceedings if required. No specific issues regarding the GST assessment or the validity of the order were decided on merits.

Key Issues

1. Whether the writ petition is maintainable when an alternative remedy of appeal has been availed by the petitioner? The petitioner argued that the writ petition was filed challenging the order dated 01.12.2023. The respondents did not explicitly argue on the maintainability of the writ petition, but the Court's decision implies that availing the alternative remedy rendered the writ petition infructuous. The core issue revolved around the procedural aspect of challenging a GST order when an appeal mechanism exists and has been utilized.