2021 (11) TMI 270 - HC - GST

Principles of natural justice - Validity of assessment orders - reply of petitioner not considered properly - HELD THAT - Since there has been an appellate remedy provided under Section 107 of the Act, which can very well be availed by the petitioner as the same has been mentioned in the impugned order itself, as there is no plausible reason on the part of the petitioner for not availing such an appeal remedy, but the petitioner has filed the writ petitions by invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. It is the settled proposition that if want of jurisdiction, violation of the statute and denial of principles of natural justice, only in such circumstances, the Writ Petition would be entertained by this Court against order in original ie., the orders passed by the original assessing authority - In every Tax Statute, there is hierarchy of authorities provided for preferring further appeal, revisions etc. Such appeal remedies shall be availed by the assesses/taxpayers without default. Herein the case in hand, though there is an appeal remedy under Section 107 of the Act, the petitioner has chosen to file the Writ Petitions before this Court on the ground that the reason stated in the reply or objection or show cause by the petitioner had not been properly considered or not considered in a proper perspective. Such an issue can very well be decided by the appellate authority as it coupled with facts and therefore, each and every minute details of the facts on tax matters cannot be gone into by the Writ Court. In that view of the matter, this Court feels that while rejecting these Writ Petitions, liberty can be given to the petitioner to file an appeal before the appellate authority as per the provisions of the Act. All these Writ Petitions are rejected with liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal before the appellate authority and if any such appeal is filed, the time taken or consumed by the petitioner in filing these writ petitions can be excluded for calculating the limitation period - Petition dismissed.

Summary

Issues involved:
Challenging assessment and demand orders under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 through writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India without availing appeal remedy under Section 107 of the Act.

Analysis:
The petitioner, registered with a specific Assessment Circle, filed monthly returns under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. Following an inspection, the respondent issued intimation and subsequent demand cum show cause notices for multiple assessment years. The petitioner responded with elaborate replies and objections, but the assessing authority passed the impugned orders without proper consideration. The petitioner chose to challenge these orders directly through writ petitions, bypassing the appeal remedy under Section 107 of the Act.

The learned Government Advocate argued that the entire procedure under Section 73 of the Act was diligently followed, providing the petitioner with opportunities to respond and participate in the process. It was contended that since the petitioner was afforded due process, the writ petitions could not be entertained, and the petitioner should have opted for the appeal route under Section 107 of the Act.

The Court, after considering the submissions from both sides, emphasized the availability of appellate remedies in tax statutes and the importance of adhering to the hierarchy of authorities for appeals and revisions. The Court noted that the petitioner's claim of lack of proper consideration of objections could be addressed by the appellate authority, which is better equipped to delve into factual details in tax matters. Therefore, the Court decided to reject the writ petitions but granted the petitioner liberty to file an appeal before the appellate authority as per the provisions of the Act.

In conclusion, the Court dismissed all the writ petitions with the liberty given to the petitioner to pursue the appeal route before the appellate authority. The Court also mentioned that the time taken in filing the writ petitions could be excluded from the limitation period for filing an appeal. No costs were awarded, and connected Miscellaneous Petitions were closed.