Shining Steel Through Its Proprietor Kartik Gupta vs. Union Of INDIA & Ors.

Held

The Court held that the Petitioner has an effective alternative remedy of statutory appeal under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, against the Order-in-Original dated December 22, 2023. The Court noted the significant delay of nearly three years in filing the writ petition. Regarding the challenge to the notifications, the Court observed that Notification No. 9/2023 (Central Tax) is under consideration before the Supreme Court, and any benefit from that judgment would enure to the Petitioner. The Court did not decide the validity of the notifications on merits in the present writ petition. Instead, it directed that if the Petitioner chooses to avail the statutory remedy of appeal, the Appellate Authority shall consider the appeal along with an application for condonation of delay in accordance with law. The writ petition, along with pending applications, was disposed of with these directions.

Facts

The Petitioner, Shining Steel, through its proprietor Kartik Gupta, filed a writ petition challenging a Show Cause Notice dated September 23, 2023, and an Order-in-Original dated December 22, 2023. The Petitioner also sought to declare Notification No. 09/2023 (Central Tax) dated March 31, 2023, and Notification No. 09/2023 (State Tax) dated June 22, 2023, as ultra vires Section 168A of the Delhi Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The Court noted that the validity of Notification No. 9/2023 (Central Tax) was under consideration before the Supreme Court in M/s HCC-SEW-MEIL-AAG JV v. Assistant Commissioner of State Tax & Ors. The writ petition was filed after a delay of nearly three years, and the Petitioner had an effective alternative remedy of statutory appeal under Section 107 of the CGST Act.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Petitioner has an effective alternative remedy of statutory appeal under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, against the Order-in-Original dated December 22, 2023? The Petitioner's contention, implied by filing a writ petition, is that the alternative remedy is not effective or that the issues raised warrant direct High Court intervention. The Revenue's contention, as indicated by the Court's observation, is that Section 107 provides an effective statutory appeal. 2. Whether the Notification No. 09/2023 (Central Tax) dated 31.03.2023 and Notification No. 09/2023 (State Tax) dated 22.06.2023 are ultra vires the provisions of Section 168A of the Delhi Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017? The Petitioner argues these notifications are ultra vires. The Revenue's stance on this issue is not explicitly recorded, but their defense of the Order-in-Original implies upholding the validity of the relevant notifications.