2024 (2) TMI 652 - HC - GST

Maintainability of petition - availability of alternative remedy - Transitional Credit - violation of Section 140 read with Rule 117 of the CGST Act and Rules made thereunder - appellant submits that appeal could be futile exercise inasmuch as the claim of the petitioner is in respect of the excise duty component allegedly paid by the petitioner - HELD THAT - This Court does not find any substance in the submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioner. The appellate authority will examine all the documents and evidence submitted by the petitioner/assessee while deciding the appeal. Therefore, the contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner that since there is no express provision for remanding the matter back to the assessing authority, the appeal would be futile exercise, cannot be agreed upon. Hence, considering the provision of statutory appeal available to the petitioner against the impugned order in Exhibit P-7, the present writ petition is dismissed on the ground of availability of alternative remedy.

Summary

Issues involved:
The issues involved in the judgment are the impugning of an assessment order under the provisions of KSGST/CGST Act, 2017 and the availability of alternative remedy through a statutory appeal.

Impugned Assessment Order:
The petitioner, a registered dealer under the KSGST Act, filed returns for the financial year 2017-18. Discrepancies in transitional credit claimed were noticed, leading to a Show Cause Notice. It was found that the petitioner had availed CGST amount as transitional credit, but certain bills were not found or were unclear. The petitioner was asked to produce supporting documents, following which the assessment proceedings were conducted. The order disallowed a portion of the transitional credit claimed, imposing interest and penalty under the Act.

Alternative Remedy - Statutory Appeal:
The petitioner approached the Court invoking writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India against the assessment order, arguing that the appeal process could be futile due to the nature of the claim. The Court disagreed, stating that the appellate authority would thoroughly examine all documents and evidence during the appeal process. The Court held that since there is a provision for filing an appeal under Section 107 of the CGST/KSGST Act, 2017, the writ petition was dismissed on the ground of the availability of an alternative remedy. However, the Court noted that if the petitioner chooses to file an appeal, it would be decided on its own merit.