M/S Chess In Lake City vs. State Of Rajasthan

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Chess In Lake City, filed multiple writ petitions before the Rajasthan High Court at Jodhpur. The petitions challenged an unspecified order or action passed by the Deputy Commissioner (State Tax), Circle-A, Enforcement Wing-III, Jaipur, and other revenue authorities. The respondents, including the State of Rajasthan and the Union of India, argued that the impugned order was appealable under Section 107(1) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner indicated an intention to file an appeal within three weeks, and the revenue agreed not to raise the issue of limitation if the appeal was filed within that period.

Held

The Court held that the writ petitions were not maintainable due to the availability of an alternative statutory remedy of appeal under Section 107(1) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The Court reasoned that when an efficacious alternative remedy exists, writ jurisdiction should not be ordinarily invoked. The Court dismissed the writ petitions but granted the petitioner liberty to raise all questions before the appellate authority. The appellate authority was directed to consider and decide the appeal expeditiously and in accordance with the law. The issue of the merits of the impugned order was expressly left undecided by the High Court.

Key Issues

1. Whether the writ petitions are maintainable in light of the availability of an alternative statutory remedy of appeal under Section 107(1) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017? The petitioner contended that they intended to file an appeal against the impugned order. The respondents argued that the writ petitions should not be entertained because an appeal lies under Section 107(1) of the Act of 2017. The respondents further submitted that if the petitioner files an appeal within three weeks, the issue of limitation would not be pressed.