M/S Chobey Industries Company Through Its Proprietor Shri Ravi Kumar vs. The State Of Madhya Pradesh

Held

The Court held that the writ petition is not maintainable due to the availability of an alternative remedy. The Court reasoned that the petitioner's grievance, including the argument regarding the principle of opportunity of hearing, can be effectively raised before the appellate authority as provided under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. Therefore, the Court dismissed the petition on the ground of alternative remedy, allowing the petitioner to pursue their remedies in accordance with the law. No specific finding was made on the merits of the petitioner's claim regarding the opportunity of hearing.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Chobey Industries Company, through its proprietor Shri Ravi Kumar, filed a writ petition before the Madhya Pradesh High Court at Gwalior. The petition sought to quash a notice and demand order dated May 13, 2022, and July 4, 2022, respectively, passed by Respondent No. 3. The respondents, the State of Madhya Pradesh and others, opposed the petition, arguing that it was not maintainable due to the availability of an alternative remedy under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner indicated an intention to challenge the order based on the principle of opportunity of hearing.

Key Issues

1. Whether the writ petition is maintainable when an alternative remedy of appeal is available under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017? The petitioner argued that the impugned orders should be quashed on the principle of opportunity of hearing. The respondents contended that the writ petition is not maintainable due to the existence of an alternative statutory remedy under Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017, and that the petitioner's grievance regarding the opportunity of hearing can be raised before the appellate authority.