2023 (12) TMI 1099 - HC - GST

Payment of amount to the supplier through banking channel - HELD THAT - As the respondents are represented through their counsel, notice need not to be issued - Let this petition be listed on 07th February, 2024.

Summary

Issues involved:
The issues involved in the judgment are related to the consideration of plea regarding payment made to the supplier through banking channel, the necessity of establishing facts about missing dealer or supplier's business closure, and the availability of alternative remedy through appeal against the impugned order.

Consideration of plea regarding payment made through banking channel:
The petitioner contended that the authority did not consider the plea regarding payment made to the supplier through a banking channel while passing the order dated 16th August, 2023. The petitioner raised this plea in response to the order, emphasizing the mode of payment made to the supplier.

Establishing facts about missing dealer or supplier's business closure:
Reference was made to a judgment by the Calcutta High Court in a similar case where it was concluded that certain norms needed to be followed before passing an order. These norms included verifying facts such as missing dealer, closure of business by the supplier, or inadequate assets of the supplier. Failure to adhere to these norms rendered the impugned order invalid.

Availability of alternative remedy through appeal:
The respondents argued that the petitioner had an alternative remedy available through an appeal against the impugned order. They requested the court not to entertain the petition on this basis. However, considering the submissions made by the petitioner's counsel and upon reviewing the impugned order, the court deemed it necessary to consider the matter further.

Court's directives and interim order:
The court issued notice and stay application to the respondents, directing them to file a reply to the petition before the next hearing date. The petition was scheduled to be listed on 7th February, 2024. Meanwhile, any further recovery from the petitioner pursuant to the order dated 16th August, 2023, was stayed until further notice. An interim order was passed in favor of the petitioner, allowing the respondents to seek vacation of the interim order after filing a reply to the petition.