Bhadrakali vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of GST Appeal

Facts

The petitioner, Bhadrakali, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 21.10.2024 passed by the Commercial Tax Officer, Bodinayakannur, Theni (the second respondent). The petitioner had also filed an appeal before the Deputy Commissioner of GST Appeal, Theni (the first respondent) on 21.03.2025, and had deposited 10% of the disputed tax amount. The writ petition was filed to quash the order of the second respondent. The amount in dispute is not specified.

Held

The Court noted that the petitioner had already filed an appeal before the appellate authority on 21.03.2025 and had deposited 10% of the disputed tax amount. Consequently, the Court directed the appellate authority to number the appeal without reference to limitation and to dispose of it on merits and in accordance with law. The writ petition was disposed of in terms of this direction. The Court did not decide on the merits of the original order passed by the second respondent, as the matter was remitted to the appellate authority. No costs were awarded. The issue of the validity of the order passed by the second respondent was not decided by the High Court.

Key Issues

1. Whether the writ petition is maintainable when an alternative remedy of appeal is available and has been availed by the petitioner? Petitioner's argument: The petitioner had filed a writ petition, implying a challenge to the order. The specific grounds for challenging the order are not detailed in the provided text. Revenue's argument: The learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondents pointed out that the petitioner had already filed an appeal before the appellate authority and deposited 10% of the disputed tax amount, suggesting the writ petition was premature or not the appropriate forum.