Laxmi Kripa Ispat Privat Limited vs. Joint Commissioner (Appeals)

Facts

The petitioner, Laxmi Kripa Ispat Private Limited, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur. The petition challenged orders passed by the Joint Commissioner (Appeals) and the Assistant Commissioner, State Goods and Services Tax, Raipur. The petitioner sought to declare these orders as without authority of law, bad in law, and in violation of fundamental rights and principles of natural justice. Additionally, the petitioner prayed for a direction to prevent coercive actions against them until an Appellate Tribunal is constituted in Chhattisgarh, to make an alternate remedy available under Section 112 of the CGST and CGGST Act, 2017.

Held

The Court considered the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner seeking permission to withdraw the petition with liberty to file an appeal under Section 112 of the CGST and CGGST Act, 2017, before the Appellate Tribunal. The learned counsel for the respondents stated that they had no objection to this prayer. The Court, upon due consideration, allowed the prayer. Consequently, the petitioner was permitted to withdraw the writ petition with the liberty to avail the remedy by filing an appeal before the Appellate Tribunal. The Court did not decide on the merits of the case or the validity of the impugned orders. The primary outcome was the withdrawal of the petition by the petitioner and the dismissal of the petition as withdrawn.

Key Issues

1. Whether the impugned orders passed by Respondent No. 1 (Joint Commissioner (Appeals)) and Respondent No. 2 (Assistant Commissioner) are without authority of law, bad in law, and/or in violation of fundamental rights and/or in violation of principles of natural justice, thereby warranting quashing or setting aside. 2. Whether coercive actions should be restrained against the petitioner until an Appellate Tribunal is constituted in the State of Chhattisgarh, to provide an alternate remedy under Section 112 of the CGST and CGGST Act, 2017. Contentions of the Petitioner: The petitioner argued that the orders passed by the authorities were illegal and violated their fundamental rights and principles of natural justice. They also contended that the absence of a constituted Appellate Tribunal in Chhattisgarh prevented them from availing the statutory remedy of appeal under Section 112 of the CGST and CGGST Act, 2017, and sought protection from coercive recovery actions. Contentions of the Respondents: The respondents, represented by the Panel Lawyer, had no objection to the petitioner's prayer to withdraw the petition with liberty to file an appeal before the Appellate Tribunal.