2023 (3) TMI 727 - HC - GST

Maintainability of petition - availability of equally efficacious and alternative remedy by way of appeal - Seeking release of goods alongwith vehicle - HELD THAT - Without expressing any opinion on the merits / demerits of the rival contentions, it is deemed just and appropriate to dispose of this petition reserving liberty in favour of the petitioner to take recourse to such remedies as available in law including approaching the First Appellate Authority by way of challenge to the Annexure A and B and in accordance with law. It is further directed that having regard to the perishable nature of the subject goods involved in the present petition, in the peculiar / special facts and circumstances of the instant case, the respondents are directed to release the Conveyance No.GJ-03-AX-7785 and GJ-03- BY-8577 along with the goods contained therein in favour of the petitioner, within a period of 48 hours from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is made clear that the present order is passed in the peculiar / special facts and circumstances of the instant case and shall not be treated as a precedent nor have any precedential value for any purpose whatsoever Subject to the aforesaid directions, petition stands disposed of.

Summary

Issues involved:
Petition seeking writs of certiorari and mandamus, quashing impugned orders, releasing goods without penalty, setting aside penalty demands, challenging jurisdictional facts, violation of GST Act provisions, and seeking further reliefs.

Analysis:
1. The petitioner sought various reliefs through the petition, including quashing impugned orders, releasing conveyances with goods, setting aside penalty demands under CGST Act, challenging jurisdictional facts, and asserting no violation of GST Act provisions.

2. The court heard arguments from both parties and noted the availability of an alternative remedy through appeal before the First Appellate Authority. Without expressing opinion on the merits, the court disposed of the petition, allowing the petitioner to pursue remedies, including challenging Annexure A and B through proper channels.

3. Considering the perishable nature of the goods involved, the court directed the respondents to release the conveyances and goods to the petitioner within 48 hours from the date of the order, emphasizing the unique circumstances of the case.

4. The court clarified that its order was specific to the case at hand and should not be considered a precedent. All rival contentions were left open, and no opinion was expressed on them.

5. In case the petitioner chooses to appeal before the First Appellate Authority, the court directed the Authority to consider the appeal independently, without being influenced by the current order's observations or directions, ensuring a fair and unbiased review of the case based on merits and in accordance with the law.