M.G. Industries Limited Through Its Authorized Representative Shri Alok Maheshwari vs. Union Of INDIA

Held

The Court did not decide the merits of the case. The petitioner, after considering the respondent's submission regarding the availability of an appeal under Section 107 of the CGST Act, sought to withdraw the writ petition. The petitioner was granted liberty to file a properly constituted appeal, preserving all its available contentions as per law. The Court made it clear that if such an appeal is preferred, it shall be considered and decided by the Department in accordance with law. The Court explicitly stated that it had not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case, and the matter would be decided on its own merits in the appellate proceedings. The writ petition was disposed of with these directions.

Facts

M.G. Industries Limited, the petitioner, filed a writ petition before the Madhya Pradesh High Court at Gwalior. The petitioner sought to quash two impugned orders dated February 5, 2025, and February 4, 2025, passed by Respondent No. 3. The petitioner's primary grievance was that these orders were received belatedly in November 2025, after their issuance. The petitioner also sought a remand of the matter to Respondent No. 3 for a fresh decision after granting a proper opportunity of hearing. The respondent, Union of India and others, opposed the petition, arguing that an alternative remedy of appeal under Section 107 of the CGST Act was available to the petitioner.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to have the impugned orders dated 05.02.2025 and 04.02.2025 quashed, considering the belated receipt of these orders, and if so, under what provision of law? 2. Whether the matter should be remanded to Respondent No. 3 for a fresh decision after granting a proper opportunity of hearing to the petitioner? Petitioner's Contentions: The petitioner argued that the impugned orders were received belatedly in November 2025, implying a procedural irregularity or prejudice. They sought the quashing of these orders and a remand for a fresh hearing. Respondent's Contentions: The respondent contended that the petitioner has an alternative and efficacious remedy of appeal under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act, 2017. Therefore, the writ petition is not maintainable, and all contentions raised by the petitioner should be considered in the appeal.