9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (12) TMI 332X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... an efficacious remedy against the impugned actions of the Respondents 2 and 4. The circumstance that the statute requires a pre-deposit for instituting an appeal can hardly be a ground to bypass the statutory remedy - This petition does not question the constitutional validity of this provision; however, several High Courts have upheld it. The impugned order holds that the facts attract the provisions of Section 16 (2) (c) of the CGST Act. The petitioner disputes this position and, in any event, relies on a circular. The only reason for the non-exhaustion of the alternate remedy is the statutory requirement of pre-deposit. It is evident that the Petitioner, by instituting this Petition, only intended to take a chance and see whether any re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly, we are quite surprised with the first sentence in paragraph 13 of this Petition wherein it is pleaded that the Petitioner has no alternative, much less an efficacious remedy against the impugned actions of the Respondents 2 and 4. 4. However, if paragraph 13 is read in its entirety, the Petitioner has admitted having an alternate remedy under Section 107 of the CGST Act. The Petitioner has, however, pleaded that the Petitioner is preferring this Writ, since there is a pre-deposit requirement for appeal, and in this situation since Respondent No. 7 has been admitted into insolvency, it is an issue that does not require any further adjudication. 5. The circumstance that the statute requires a pre-deposit for instituting an appeal can hard ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... remedies to stall the adjudication process or avoid the pre-deposit requirements under the statute. In paragraph 13, this Petitioner has virtually admitted that it is not resorting to the appellate remedy because there is a pre-deposit requirement for the appeal. The circumstance about the 7th Respondent admitted in the insolvency is entirely irrelevant for deciding the issue of an alternate remedy. 9. To test the petitioner's bona fide, we adjourned this Petition for some time to enable the learned Counsel for the Petitioner to obtain instructions on whether the Petitioner was willing to deposit the demanded amounts. Mr Kamat, on instructions submitted, said that apart from the Rs two crores that the Petitioner deposited on 3 December ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sit amount could not have been reduced below the statutory remedy, and discretion under Article 226 of the Constitution cannot be exercised against the mandatory requirement of statutory provision. 13. In Assistant Commissioner (CT) LTU. Kakinada Ors vs. M/s. Glaxo Smith Kline Consumer Health Care Limited 2020 19 SCC 681 , the Hon ble Supreme Court took a strict view of parties tendency to bypass the statutory remedies without sufficient cause or provide the pre-deposit requirement. The Court held that the circumstance that a party may have an arguable case is quite irrelevant in such matters, and based on such a circumstance, the party should not be allowed to bypass the alternate statutory remedy. 14. For all the above reasons, we dismiss ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
