Writ petition challenging GST order dismissed as statutory appeal remedy available under Section 107.

Case Name:

M/S. Systematic Conscom Ltd. vs. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Court No. 29 Case: Writ Tax No. 235 of 2019

Key Takeaways:

- The court reiterated the principle that if a statutory remedy of appeal is available, a writ petition should not be entertained.

- The court held that even if a pure legal question is involved, the petitioner cannot bypass the statutory appeal remedy.

- The decision reinforces the importance of exhausting statutory remedies before approaching the court through a writ petition.

Issue:

Whether the writ petition filed by the petitioner challenging the order passed under Section 73(9) of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, is maintainable when a statutory remedy of appeal is available under Section 107 of the Act.

Facts:

The petitioner, M/S. Systematic Conscom Ltd., filed a writ petition challenging an order passed against it under Section 73(9) of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, by the Deputy Commissioner, Commercial Tax, NOIDA. The order also imposed penalty and interest on the petitioner.

Arguments:

The petitioner argued that a pure legal question was involved, and therefore, the writ petition should be entertained by the court.

The respondents contended that the order in question was appealable under Section 107 of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and hence, the petitioner should avail the statutory remedy of appeal.

Key Legal Precedents:

The court did not cite any specific legal precedents in this case. However, the decision is based on the well-established principle that if a statutory remedy of appeal is available, a writ petition should not be entertained.

Judgement:

The High Court dismissed the writ petition, holding that the order in question was appealable under Section 107 of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The court observed that in an appeal, questions of fact as well as law can be considered and decided. Therefore, even if a pure legal question is involved, it is not proper for the court to allow the petitioner to bypass the statutory remedy of appeal.

FAQs:

Q1. What is the significance of the court’s decision?

A1. The decision reinforces the principle that statutory remedies should be exhausted before approaching the court through a writ petition. It also emphasizes that even if a pure legal question is involved, the petitioner cannot bypass the statutory appeal remedy.

Q2. What is the impact of this decision on similar cases?

A2. This decision sets a precedent that in cases involving orders passed under the Goods and Services Tax Act, where a statutory remedy of appeal is available, the aggrieved party should first avail that remedy before filing a writ petition.

Q3. Can the petitioner appeal against this decision?

A3. Yes, the petitioner can appeal against this decision before a higher court, subject to the applicable laws and procedures.

Q4. What are the legal provisions cited in the case?

A4. The key legal provisions cited in the case are Section 73(9) of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (the provision under which the order was passed against the petitioner), and Section 107 of the same Act (the provision providing for the statutory remedy of appeal).

Q5. What is the significance of the court’s observation regarding considering questions of fact and law in an appeal?

A5. The court’s observation highlights that in an appeal, both questions of fact and law can be considered and decided, which is not the case in a writ petition. This observation strengthens the court’s reasoning for dismissing the writ petition and directing the petitioner to avail the statutory appeal remedy.

Heard Sri Nikhil Agrawal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri CB. Tripathi for the respondents.

The writ petition is directed against the order passed under Section 73 (9) of the U.P. GST Act, 2017 dated 21.1.2015 by the Deputy Commissioner, Commercial Tax, NOIDA and the consequential order of penalty and interest thereof.

The aforesaid order is appellable under Section 107 of the U.P. GST Act.

In view of the above statutory provision for appeal we are not inclined to entertain the petition at all.

Sri Agrawal submits that a pure legal question is involved and therefore the petitioner should not be relegated to the remedy of appeal.

In appeal question of fact as well as law both can be considered and decided. Therefore, even if question of law is arising and there may not be any dispute of fact, still it is not proper for us to allow the petitioner to bye pass the statutory remedy.

Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed on the ground of alternate remedy.

Order Date :- 1.3.2019