2020 (6) TMI 307 - HC - GST

Maintainability of appeal - appealable order or not - existence of alternative remedy - Imposition of penalty u/s 74 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 - suppressed turnover - case of petitioner is that suppression of turn over is not covered under section 74 of the Act, for the purpose of imposition of penalty - HELD THAT - The order of penalty passed under section 74 of the Act or under section 122 of the Act, are both appealable under section 107 of the Act. Since the petitioner has an alternative remedy of filing an appeal against the order dated 3.2.2020, we do not deem it necessary to exercise our jurisdiction on the merits of the case - writ petition is dismissed on the ground of alternative of remedy.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to penalty under section 74 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017.

Analysis:
The High Court heard arguments from both parties regarding the penalty imposed on the petitioner for suppressed turnover under section 74 of the Act. The petitioner's counsel contended that suppression of turnover does not fall under the purview of section 74 for penalty imposition. Conversely, the Additional Advocate General argued that the case involved search and seizure proceedings, falling within the ambit of section 74 read with section 67 of the Act. The explanation 1(ii) of Section 74 was cited to emphasize that the penalty could be imposed under either section 74 or section 122, with appeal provisions under section 107 of the Act applying to both scenarios.

The Court acknowledged that the penalty order under section 74 or section 122 was subject to appeal under section 107 of the Act. Recognizing the availability of an alternative remedy for the petitioner to challenge the penalty order by filing an appeal, the Court refrained from delving into the merits of the case. Consequently, the Court dismissed the writ petition on the grounds of the existence of an alternative legal recourse through the appeal process.