M/S Khalghat Sendhwa Tollways PVT LTD Through Sheein Banu vs. Union Of INDIA

Held

The Court held that the writ petition was not maintainable. Citing the Supreme Court's decision in Union of India v. Rajhans Impex (P) Limited, the Court noted that High Courts should generally not entertain writ petitions against an Order-in-Original without the petitioner first availing the alternative statutory remedy of appeal, unless there is a total lack of jurisdiction on the part of the assessing officer. The Court found that the petitioner had not raised any complex question of law that necessitated intervention under Article 226. Issues concerning the violation of natural justice or provisions of the GST Act and Rules could be adequately considered by the appellate authority. Therefore, the Court dismissed the writ petition, granting the petitioner liberty to avail the available statutory remedy of appeal.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Khalghat Sendhwa Tollways Pvt Ltd, engaged in road construction and toll collection, filed a writ petition challenging an Order-in-Original dated November 29, 2023, passed by the Superintendent, Central Goods & Service Tax. The order confirmed a demand for GST, interest, and penalty for the tax periods 2017-18, 2018-19, and 2019-20. The demands pertained to short/non-payment of GST on miscellaneous income, wrong availment of Input Tax Credit (ITC) due to non-payment by suppliers, and short payment of GST on composite supply. The petitioner contended violation of principles of natural justice and that the order was against law, facts, and circumstances. The revenue argued that the writ petition was not maintainable as an alternative statutory remedy of appeal was available.

Key Issues

1. Whether the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is maintainable against an Order-in-Original when an alternative statutory remedy of appeal is available, as per Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the order was passed in violation of the principles of natural justice and was otherwise against law, facts, and circumstances, implying that these grounds might warrant bypassing the alternative remedy. The judgment does not explicitly record any other arguments from the petitioner regarding the maintainability of the writ petition. Revenue's Contention: The respondent (Union of India) contended that the writ petition was not maintainable because the petitioner had not availed the alternative statutory remedy of appeal against the Order-in-Original.