Madras High Court
M/S.Srinivas Fine Arts (P) Ltd vs The State Tax Officer (Review) on 29 November, 2024
W.P.(MD) Nos.28681 to 28684 of 2024
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 29.11.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.KUMARESH BABU
W.P.(MD) No.28681 to 28684 of 2024
and
W.M.P.(MD) Nos.24313, 24315, 24317, 24318,
24319, 24321, 24331 and 24332 of 2024
M/s.Srinivas Fine Arts (P) Ltd.,
Rep., by its Authorized Signatory,
P.R.Kishore Kumar,
No.340/3, Keela Thiruthangal,
Sivakasi-626 130. .. Petitioner
Vs.
The State Tax Officer (Review),
Office of the Joint Commissioner
(ST) (Intelligence),
Virudhunagar (Intelligence),
Virudhunagar. .. Respondent
Prayer in all W.Ps.: Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution
of India, praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call
for the records pursuant to the impugned assessment orders passed by the
respondent in GSTIN No.33AABCS5323EIZU/2018-2019; GSTIN No.
33AABCS5323EIZU/2019-2020; GSTIN No.
33AABCS5323EIZU/2020-2021; and GSTIN No.
_________
Page 1 of 6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) Nos.28681 to 28684 of 2024
33AABCS5323EIZU/2021-2022, dated 09.10.2024 and quash the same
and consequentially direct the respondent to re-open the proceedings
pursuant to the impugned orders passed by the respondent dated
09.10.2024 by providing another opportunity to the petitioner to produce
all the documents.
In all W.Ps.
For Petitioner : Mrs.Lakshmi Gopinathan
for M/s.Polax Legal Solutions
For Respondent : Mr.J.K.Jeyaseelan
Government Advocate
COMMON ORDER
These writ petitions have been filed challenging the orders of assessment.
2. No grounds have been made as indicated in the order of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Assistant Commissioner of State Tax and others vs. Commercial Steel Limited reported in 2021 SCC OnLine SC 884.
For better appreciation, the relevant paragraphs are extracted hereunder:
“10. The respondent had a statutory remedy _________ Page 2 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD) Nos.28681 to 28684 of 2024 under Section 107. Instead of availing of the remedy, the respondent instituted a petition under Article 226. The existence of an alternative remedy is not an absolute bar to the maintainability of a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. But a writ petition can be entertained in exceptional circumstances where there is:
(i) a breach of fundamental rights;
(ii) a violation of the principles of natural justice;
(iii) an excess of jurisdiction; or
(iv) a challenge to the vires of the statute or delegated legislation.
11. In the present case, none of the above exceptions was established. There was, in fact, no violation of the principles of natural justice since a notice was served on the person in charge of the conveyance. In this backdrop, it was not appropriate for the High Court to entertain a writ petition. The assessment of facts would have to be carried out by the appellate authority. As a matter of fact, the High Court has while doing this exercise proceeded on the basis of surmises. However, since we are inclined to _________ Page 3 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD) Nos.28681 to 28684 of 2024 relegate the respondent to the pursuit of the alternate statutory remedy under Section 107, this Court makes no observation on the merits of the case of the respondent.
12. For the above reasons, we allow the appeal and set aside the impugned order [Commercial Steel Co. v. Commr. of State Tax, 2020 SCC OnLine TS 291] of the High Court. The writ petition filed by the respondent shall stand dismissed. However, this shall not preclude the respondent from taking recourse to appropriate remedies which are available in terms of Section 107 of the CGST Act to pursue the grievance in regard to the action which has been adopted by the State in the present case.”
3. The arguments made by the learned counsel for the petitioner are on the merits of the order, which do not come within the four parameters indicated in the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court cited supra. In view of the same, with liberty to the petitioner to approach the appellate authority by filing an appeal as provided under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, these Writ Petitions are _________ Page 4 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD) Nos.28681 to 28684 of 2024 disposed of. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
29.11.2024 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes abr To The State Tax Officer (Review), Office of the Joint Commissioner (ST) (Intelligence), Virudhunagar (Intelligence), Virudhunagar.
_________ Page 5 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD) Nos.28681 to 28684 of 2024 K.KUMARESH BABU, J.
abr W.P.(MD) Nos.28681 to 28684 of 2024 Dated: 29.11.2024 _________ Page 6 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis