M/S Gupta Transport Company Registered Office At Ab Road Near Veer Savarkar Park Shivpuri Through S vs. Union Of INDIA
Held
The Court considered the submissions advanced by both parties. The primary contention raised by the respondents was the availability of an efficacious alternative remedy of appeal to the petitioner. The Court acknowledged this point. Consequently, the High Court disposed of the writ petition with a clear direction that since the petitioner possesses an alternative remedy of appeal against the impugned order, they should avail the said remedy in accordance with the law. The Court did not delve into the merits of the petitioner's application under Section 161 of the CGST/MPGST Act, 2017, nor did it decide whether the petitioner's case was considered in the correct perspective. The operative direction was solely to pursue the appellate remedy.
Facts
The petitioner, M/s Gupta Transport Company, filed a writ petition before the Madhya Pradesh High Court at Gwalior challenging an order dated 31.03.2026. This order, passed by the respondents, dismissed the petitioner's application filed under Section 161 of the CGST/MPGST Act, 2017. The petitioner contended that their case was not considered in the correct perspective. The respondents raised a preliminary objection regarding the availability of an efficacious alternative remedy of appeal to the petitioner.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner has an efficacious alternative remedy of appeal against the order dated 31.03.2026 passed by the respondents, thereby precluding the High Court from entertaining a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution? (Question of law) Petitioner's contention: The petitioner sought to have the order set aside and the matter remanded for fresh consideration, implying that the dismissal of their rectification application was erroneous and that the alternative remedy might not be adequate or that the court should consider their petition on merits. Respondents' contention: The respondents argued that the petitioner has a statutory right of appeal against the impugned order and therefore should avail that remedy instead of approaching the High Court under its writ jurisdiction.
Sections Cited
Section 161
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORDER Per: Justice Anand Pathak
The instant petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is preferred by the petitioner seeking following reliefs:
"
That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly set aside the order dated 31.03.2026 and remand the matter back to the Respondent No. 4 to reconsider the rectification application afresh, after granting the petitioner a chance of personal hearing, and to pass a reasoned order. 1 WP-12953-2026 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:12173 (ANAND PATHAK) JUDGE (PUSHPENDRA YADAV) JUDGE
That, any oth
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.