M/S Maa Umiya Engineering Works Through Proprietor Shri Vishnu Prasad Patidar vs. Union Of INDIA

Held

The Court held that the impugned order passed by the Assistant Commissioner is appealable under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. Consequently, the Court found it inappropriate to entertain the writ petition due to the existence of an alternative and efficacious remedy. The petition was dismissed on this ground. The Court granted liberty to the petitioner to pursue such remedies as are available in law. Furthermore, the Court directed that if the appeal is filed within two weeks from the date of the order, it shall be considered on its merits without reference to any delay.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Maa Umiya Engineering Works, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Madhya Pradesh challenging an order dated 12.04.2023 passed by the Assistant Commissioner, CGST and Central Excise, Division - II, Ujjain. The order was passed in case no. UJN/GST/003/DIV-II/AC-MVM/2022-23. The petitioner sought to question this order through the writ petition. The respondents were the Union of India, the Commissioner of CGST and CX, and the Assistant Commissioner, CGST and Central Excise.

Key Issues

1. Whether the writ petition is maintainable before this Court, given the availability of an alternative and efficacious remedy under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner approached the High Court by way of a writ petition, presumably believing it to be the appropriate forum. No specific argument is recorded in the judgment regarding the maintainability of the writ petition or against the availability of the alternative remedy. Revenue's Contention: The respondents, through their counsel, implicitly argued for the dismissal of the writ petition based on the availability of an alternative remedy under Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017.