2021-TIOL-234-SC-GST-LB

ACST Vs Commercial Steel Ltd

GST - Revenue is in appeal against the judgment of the Division Bench of the High Court of Telangana wherein inter alia, in exercise of its writ jurisdiction, the Bench set aside the action of the appellants in collecting an amount of Rs 4,16,447/- from the respondent towards tax and penalty under the Act 2017 and directed a refund together with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from 13 December 2019.

Held: Respondent had a statutory remedy u/s 107 but instead of availing of the remedy, the respondent instituted a petition under Article 226 - The existence of an alternate 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 a breach of fundamental rights; a violation of the principles of natural justice; an excess of jurisdiction; or a challenge to the vires of the statute or delegated legislation - In the present case, none of the above exceptions was established - In this backdrop, it was not appropriate for the High Court to entertain a writ petition - As a matter of fact, the High Court has (while carrying out assessment of facts) proceeded on the basis of surmises - However, since Bench is inclined to relegate the respondent to the pursuit of the alternate statutory remedy under Section 107, it makes no observation on the merits of the case of the respondent - Appeal is allowed by setting aside the impugned order of the High Court - Writ petition filed by the respondent shall stand dismissed: Supreme Court Larger Bench [para 11 to 13]

- Appeal allowed: SUPREME COURT OF INDIA