2024 (7) TMI 48 - HC - GST

Maintainability of petition - availability of alternative remedy - Levy of tax and interest along with recommendation of prosecution under Section 132(1) of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - HELD THAT - The petitioner/company is having registered office at Agra and respondent No.3-Additional Commissioner, CGST Central Excise, Agra Commissionerate, Agra (Uttar Pradesh) has passed the impugned order. Therefore, appeal would lie to the Additional Commissioner (Appeals), GST, 3/194, Vishal Khand-3, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow (U.P.) as advised in the impugned order. The present Writ Petition stands dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty.

Summary

Issues: Jurisdiction of High Court, Alternative Remedy of Appeal, Composite Order in Multiple States

Jurisdiction of High Court:
The petitioner filed a Writ Petition challenging an order imposing tax demand and interest under the GST Act. The High Court noted that the petitioner was informed of the remedy of appeal before the Additional Commissioner (Appeals) within 90 days. The respondent argued that the High Court lacked territorial jurisdiction to entertain the Writ Petition due to the availability of an alternative remedy of appeal. After extensive arguments, the petitioner's counsel requested to withdraw the Writ Petition with liberty to approach the Appellate Authority. The High Court, considering the jurisdictional aspect, dismissed the Writ Petition as withdrawn with the mentioned liberty.

Alternative Remedy of Appeal:
The petitioner, despite being informed of the appeal remedy before the Additional Commissioner (Appeals), chose to approach the High Court through the Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The respondent pointed out the availability of the alternative remedy of appeal and emphasized that the High Court lacked territorial jurisdiction to entertain the Writ Petition. The petitioner's counsel eventually requested to withdraw the Writ Petition, acknowledging the availability of the alternative appellate route.

Composite Order in Multiple States:
The petitioner, a company with a registered office in Agra, challenged a composite order related to GST returns filed in 13 states with different GSTINs. This led to confusion regarding the appropriate appellate authority with territorial jurisdiction. The respondent, Additional Commissioner, CGST & Central Excise, Agra Commissionerate, Agra (U.P.), issued the impugned order, advising that the appeal should be filed before the Additional Commissioner (Appeals), GST, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow (U.P.). The High Court considered the jurisdictional aspect based on the location of the registered office and the issuing authority, ultimately dismissing the Writ Petition as withdrawn with liberty to approach the Appellate Authority.