Case Background: The Patna High Court has clarified that the direct invocation of Article 226 of the Constitution of India is impermissible when a taxpayer neglects to file a statutory appeal under the Central Goods and Service Tax Act (CGST).
Challenge to Assessment Order: M/s Punit Kumar Choubey contested an assessment order, labeling it as an ex-parte order. The assesse claimed issuance of notice and multiple opportunities to explain their high input tax claims.
Missed Opportunities: Despite being provided opportunities, the assessee failed to respond to notices, and their input tax credit claims amounted to Rs. 3,78,624.23/- each under the CGST and SGST Act.
Court’s Stance on Remedial Options: The High Court underscored its authority to intervene under Article 226 only in the presence of a breach of natural justice or neglect of due procedural steps. However, in this instance, the petitioner neglected the available statutory remedy under Section 107 of the BGST Act within the specified timeframe.
Writ Petition Dismissed: The Court concluded that as the petitioner did not allege any jurisdictional error, breach of natural justice, or misuse of the court process, and considering the existence of the statutory remedy, the writ petition was dismissed. The petitioner’s failure to pursue the appellate remedy barred the use of Article 226 in this context.
M/s Punit Kumar Choubey Vs. Joint Commissioner of State Tax Bhabhua Anchal [C.W.J. Case No. 9975 of 2023]