Jan Kalyan Parisad vs. Union Of INDIA And 5 Others

Held

The Court held that the writ petition was not maintainable for challenging the order passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, as well as the preceding orders. Furthermore, the Court observed that the petitioner had previously filed a writ petition (Writ Tax No. 690 of 2020) on the same or similar grounds, which was dismissed by the Court on December 15, 2020. Given these circumstances, the Court found no good reason to grant any relief to the petitioner and consequently dismissed the writ petition. The review application filed subsequently also failed as the applicant could not point out any apparent error of law or fact in the original judgment. The review application was therefore rejected.

Facts

The petitioner, Jan Kalyan Parisad, filed a writ petition challenging multiple orders, including an order in original dated March 28, 2017, an order in appeal dated February 5, 2018, an order from the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal dated August 30, 2019, and subsequent communications from the Commissioner, Central GST & Central Excise, Kanpur, dated September 8, 2020, and February 17, 2022. These communications pertained to the non-deposit of a requisite amount pursuant to the petitioner's application under the SVLDRS-2019 scheme, with a disputed amount of Rs. 17,72,021/- to be adjusted against a due Service Tax of Rs. 17,75,915/-. The High Court noted that the writ petition was not maintainable to challenge the orders of the Tribunal and that this was the second writ petition filed by the petitioner, the first having been dismissed on December 15, 2020. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed.

Key Issues

1. Whether a writ petition is maintainable to challenge orders passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal and prior orders in the hierarchy. 2. Whether the petitioner is entitled to relief in the second writ petition, given the dismissal of a prior writ petition on similar grounds. Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner sought a writ of certiorari to quash the impugned orders and a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to adjust the deposited amount of Rs. 17,72,021/- against the due Service Tax of Rs. 17,75,915/- under the SVLDRS-2019 scheme. The specific arguments made by the petitioner in the original writ petition are not detailed in the provided text, but the relief sought indicates a dispute over the adjustment of tax dues. Revenue's Arguments: The revenue, represented by the Union of India and others, contended that the writ petition was not maintainable, particularly concerning the challenge to the Tribunal's order. They also highlighted the dismissal of a previous writ petition filed by the petitioner on December 15, 2020, suggesting a lack of merit or a procedural bar to the current petition.