Chena Ram Jakhar vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax Jabalpur
Held
The Court held that since the GST Tribunal has now been constituted and has commenced functioning, matters that are liable to be decided by the Tribunal should be adjudicated there. The Court acknowledged that at the time of the previous order relied upon by the petitioner, the Tribunal was not established, justifying the High Court's entertainment of writ petitions then. However, with the Tribunal's operational status, the High Court should not be burdened with such matters. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of on the grounds that the appropriate forum for challenging the orders, especially given the procedural history of dismissal for delay and non-appearance before the Appellate Authority, is now the GST Tribunal. No specific finding was made on the merits of the original appeals.
Facts
The petitioner, Chena Ram Jakhar, filed a writ petition challenging three orders dated 21.02.2025 passed by the Appellate Authority (Respondent No. 3). These orders pertained to the financial years 2017-2018, 2019-2020, and 2020-2021. The appeals before the Appellate Authority were dismissed on grounds of delay and non-appearance. The petitioner relied on a previous High Court order in similar circumstances. However, the Court noted that the GST Tribunal had since started functioning.
Key Issues
1. Whether the writ petition is maintainable before the High Court given the establishment and functioning of the GST Tribunal, particularly when the appeals before the Appellate Authority were dismissed on delay and non-appearance. (Question of law) Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the present petition should be entertained by the High Court, citing a previous order from this Court dealing with similar facts and circumstances. This implies an argument for the High Court's jurisdiction based on precedent and the specific situation. Revenue/State's Contention: The respondents (Assistant Commissioner of State Tax and others) did not explicitly record any arguments in the judgment. However, their appearance and the Court's subsequent order suggest they implicitly supported the view that the matter should now be directed to the GST Tribunal.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORDER Per: Vivek Rusia, Acting Chief Justice The present petition is filed against three orders dated 21.02.2025 passed by the respondent No.3/Appellate Authority in respect of financial years 2017-2018, 2019-2020 and 2020-2021, although the appeals have been dismissed on the ground of delay as well as non-appearance.
Now, the GST Tribunal has started functioning, therefore these orders are liable to be challenged before the Tribunal. So far as the reliance placed by the learned counsel for the petitioner on the order passed by this Court in similar facts and circumstances, admittedly, at that time, the Tribunal was not established. Therefore, the writ petitions were entertained, 1 WP-40475-
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.