The Allahabad High Court while allowing a petition observed that once the Division Bench of the High Court has directed the assessee to avail of alternative remedy as provided under Section 107 of the Act, the appeal cannot be dismissed as not maintainable.
A Single Bench of Justice Piyush Agrawal passed this order while hearing a petition filed by M/S New Okhla Industrial Development Authority.
The petition has been filed inter alia for the following reliefs:
“(a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 29.2.2024 passed by the Additional Commissioner in appeal preferred by the Petitioner to the extent that it holds the said Appeal as premature on the erroneous ground that no appealable order has been passed by any adjudicating authority;
(b) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the orders dated 11.3.2023 and 12.4.2022 passed by the Respondent No 3 vide which the Respondent No 3 directed the Respondent No 4 to deduct an amount of Rs 90,90,696/- from the bank account of the Petitioner;”
Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has debited/adjusted its electronic cash ledger in order to intimate the authorities of the discharge of its tax liability for the month of July, 2017, however being not satisfied, the order dated 4.4.2022 was passed and subsequently on 11.3.2022 as well as on 12.4.2022 a notice under Section 79 of the CGST Act was issued by which recovery of demand of interest was made.
He further submitted that feeling aggrieved to the said order, the petitioner has preferred Petition, which was dismissed by order dated 20.5.2022 with direction to the petitioner to avail of alternative remedy under Section 107 of the Act.
He also submitted that in pursuance of the said order, the petitioner has filed an appeal but the same was dismissed by order dated 29.2.2024 on the ground of maintainability.
He said that the aforesaid facts have been noticed in the impugned order however the appeal has been dismissed on the ground that the appeal under Section 107 of the Act, is not maintainable.
On a pointed query put to Mahajan, counsel for the respondent, that once the Writ Court has directed the petitioner to avail of alternative remedy under Section 107 of the Act, how the impugned order could be passed, he could not reply the same.
Once the Division Bench of the Court has directed the petitioner to avail of alternative remedy as provided under Section 107 of the Act, the impugned order cannot be sustained in the eyes of law and therefore, the matter requires reconsideration by the appellate authority, the Court observed.
In view of the above, the Court allowed the petition and set aside the order dated 29.2.2024.
The post appeared first on .
A Single Bench of Justice Piyush Agrawal passed this order while hearing a petition filed by M/S New Okhla Industrial Development Authority.
The petition has been filed inter alia for the following reliefs:
“(a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 29.2.2024 passed by the Additional Commissioner in appeal preferred by the Petitioner to the extent that it holds the said Appeal as premature on the erroneous ground that no appealable order has been passed by any adjudicating authority;
(b) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the orders dated 11.3.2023 and 12.4.2022 passed by the Respondent No 3 vide which the Respondent No 3 directed the Respondent No 4 to deduct an amount of Rs 90,90,696/- from the bank account of the Petitioner;”
Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has debited/adjusted its electronic cash ledger in order to intimate the authorities of the discharge of its tax liability for the month of July, 2017, however being not satisfied, the order dated 4.4.2022 was passed and subsequently on 11.3.2022 as well as on 12.4.2022 a notice under Section 79 of the CGST Act was issued by which recovery of demand of interest was made.
He further submitted that feeling aggrieved to the said order, the petitioner has preferred Petition, which was dismissed by order dated 20.5.2022 with direction to the petitioner to avail of alternative remedy under Section 107 of the Act.
He also submitted that in pursuance of the said order, the petitioner has filed an appeal but the same was dismissed by order dated 29.2.2024 on the ground of maintainability.
He said that the aforesaid facts have been noticed in the impugned order however the appeal has been dismissed on the ground that the appeal under Section 107 of the Act, is not maintainable.
On a pointed query put to Mahajan, counsel for the respondent, that once the Writ Court has directed the petitioner to avail of alternative remedy under Section 107 of the Act, how the impugned order could be passed, he could not reply the same.
Once the Division Bench of the Court has directed the petitioner to avail of alternative remedy as provided under Section 107 of the Act, the impugned order cannot be sustained in the eyes of law and therefore, the matter requires reconsideration by the appellate authority, the Court observed.
In view of the above, the Court allowed the petition and set aside the order dated 29.2.2024.
The post appeared first on .