2024 (6) TMI 1252 - HC - GST

Maintainability of petition - petitioner has an alternate remedy by way of filing an appeal before the Appellate Officer/Deputy Commissioner (ST) (Appeals), Trichy - HELD THAT - There is no merits in this Writ Petition and the petitioner has an alternate remedy, the Court is inclined to dismiss this Writ Petition by giving liberty to the petitioner to file statutory appeal before the Deputy Commissioner (ST) (Appeals), Trichy under Section 107 of TNGST Act, 2017 within 30 days of this order. The petition is dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
Petitioner aggrieved by impugned order for assessment year 2018-19 due to discrepancies in Input Tax Credit. Respondent argues petitioner has alternate remedy through appeal. Court to decide on dismissal of Writ Petition and grant liberty to file statutory appeal.

Analysis:
The petitioner challenges the impugned order dated 26.04.2024, concerning the assessment year 2018-19, citing discrepancies between the credit reflected in Form GSTR 2A and the Returns filed in Form GST DRC 3B. The petitioner, described as a small-scale operator, contests the demand arising from these discrepancies. On the other hand, the respondent, represented by the learned Government Advocate, asserts that the petitioner has an alternative recourse available by appealing before the Appellate Officer/Deputy Commissioner (ST) (Appeals), Trichy. This raises the pivotal issue of whether the Writ Petition should be dismissed based on the existence of an alternative remedy.

The Court, after considering the arguments presented, finds no merit in the Writ Petition and acknowledges the availability of an alternative remedy for the petitioner. Consequently, the Court leans towards dismissing the Writ Petition while granting the petitioner the liberty to file a statutory appeal before the Deputy Commissioner (ST) (Appeals), Trichy, within 30 days of the order. This decision underscores the importance of exhausting statutory remedies before seeking relief through writ jurisdiction, ensuring adherence to the legal process and hierarchy of appeals.

The judgment emphasizes the principle that when statutory avenues for appeal exist, they should be pursued before resorting to writ jurisdiction. By providing the petitioner with the opportunity to appeal within the specified timeframe, the Court upholds the procedural requirements under the TNGST Act, 2017. Furthermore, the Court's directive that in the absence of an appeal, the respondent may proceed against the petitioner in accordance with the law underscores the significance of following due process and exhausting all available legal remedies before seeking judicial intervention.

In conclusion, the dismissal of the Writ Petition with the provision for filing a statutory appeal underscores the importance of adhering to the statutory framework and exhausting available remedies before seeking judicial review. The judgment serves as a reminder of the hierarchy of legal recourse and the need to follow established procedures to address grievances within the framework of the law.