M/S Shree Kamtanath Oils PVT LTD Through Its Authorised Signatory Kuldeep Singh Tomar vs. The State Of Madhya Pradesh
Held
The Court held that the petitioner has an alternative remedy available before the GST Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT). The reasoning was based on the submission by the respondent's counsel that the GSTAT has started accepting appeals. Therefore, the Court directed the petitioner to file a properly constituted appeal before the GSTAT as per law. The Court expressed an expectation that the GSTAT, having commenced operations, would hear the matter expeditiously on its merits and on the interim relief sought by the petitioner. The writ petition was disposed of in terms of this direction. No specific issue was expressly left undecided, as the Court's decision was based on the availability of an alternative remedy.
Facts
The petitioner, M/s Shree Kamtanath Oils Pvt Ltd, filed a writ petition before the Madhya Pradesh High Court challenging an order dated 05.08.2024 passed by the Appellate Authority and an order dated 12.08.2021 passed under Section 74 of the MPGST Act. The petitioner sought to quash these orders. The respondent, the State of Madhya Pradesh and others, through the Additional Advocate General, informed the Court that the GST Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT) had commenced accepting appeals. Based on this information, the State's counsel argued that the petitioner had an alternative remedy available before the GSTAT.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner has an alternative efficacious remedy available before the GST Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT) for challenging the orders passed by the Appellate Authority and under Section 74 of the MPGST Act? The petitioner's contention, implied by filing the writ petition, is that the orders under challenge are illegal and warrant direct intervention by the High Court, suggesting a lack of adequate alternative remedy or exceptional circumstances justifying writ jurisdiction. The respondent's contention, based on instructions from the Additional Commissioner, GST, Gwalior, is that the GSTAT is now functional and accepting appeals, thereby providing a statutory alternative remedy to the petitioner. The respondent relies on the existence of this alternative forum to argue against the High Court exercising its writ jurisdiction.
Sections Cited
Section 74
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORDER Per: Justice Anand Pathak
The present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is preferred by the petitioner seeking following reliefs: "i) The order dated 05.08.2024 (Annexure P/1) passed by the Appellate Authority, may kindly be quashed. ii) The order dated 12.08.2021 (Annexure P/2) under section 74 of the MPGST Act, may kindly be quashed. iii) Any other suitable direction which this Hon’ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be passed."
At the outset, learned counsel for the respondent/State on the basis 1 WP-41451-2025 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:953 (ANAND PATHAK)
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Madhya Pradesh High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.