Writ petitions against quasi-judicial authorities are not maintainable if statutory remedies are available unless exceptional circumstances like natural justice violations are proven.

JUDGMENT :

(Manish Choudhury, J.) :

The petitioner has instituted the instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to assail the original proceedings which was initiated by a Demand-cum-Show Cause Notice bearing no. C.No. V[15]75/ADJ/CGST-HQRS/GHY/ST/2021/1421 dated 26.04.2021 resulting into an Order-in-Original no. 61/Addl. Commr./ST/GHY/2021-22 dated 01.03.2022 passed by the Additional Commissioner, O/o the Principal Commissioner, GST & Central Excise Commissionerate, Guwahati [the respondent no. 3] and the appeal proceedings which emanated from the appeal preferred by the petitioner as appellant against the Order-in-Original dated 01.03.2022 culminating in an Order-in-Appeal bearing no. 528/GHY[A]/COM/ST/GHY/ 2023 dated 21.09.2023 of the Commissioner [Appeals], CGST, Central Excise & Customs, Guwahati [the respondent no. 2].

1.1. The Order-in-Original no. 61/Addl. Commr./ST/GHY/2021-22 [‘the Order-in-Original’, for short] dated 01.03.2022 passed by the respondent no. 3 [hereinafter referred to as ‘the Adjudicating Authority’, for easy reference] was against the interests of the petitioner. By the Order-in-Appeal bearing no. 528/GHY[A]/COM/ST/GHY/2023 [‘the Order-in-Appeal’, for short] dated 21.09.2023 of the respondent no. 2 [hereinafter referred to as ‘the Appellate Authority’, for easy reference], the appeal preferred by the petitioner as the appellant under Section 85 of the Finance Act , 1994 against the Order-in-Original was dismissed, thereby, upholding the Order-in-Original passed by the Adjudicating Authority.

2. It has been stated that the petitioner, M/s Brahmaputra Television Networks is a proprietorship firm having its registered office at Guwahati. It is mentioned that the petitioner is engaged in providing taxable service in the nature of ‘advertising agency services’ since the year 2000 and as part of its business, it provides advertising services to the State Government agencies and private parties. For the purpose of Service Tax, the petitioner had got itself registered with Service Tax Code [STC] Registration no. ATTPS7285FST001 with VAT Registration Certificate no. GRN18530220383. Subsequently, after coming into effect of the Goods and Services Tax [GST] Act, 2017 on and from 01.07.2017, the Service Tax registration and the VAT registration of the petitioner have been migrated to the GST regime with GST Registration no. 18ATTPS7285F1ZR.

3. The events which have led the petitioner to institute the present writ petition can be narrated, briefly, as follows :-

3.1. The petitioner was served with the Demand-cum-Show Cause Notice bearing no. C.No. V[15]75/ADJ/CGST-HQRS/GHY/ST/2021/1421 dated 26.04.2021 [‘the Demand-cum-Show Cause Notice’, for short] whereby the petitioner was called upon to show cause within thirty days from the receipt of the Demand-cum-Show Cause Notice as to why :

[i] Service Tax amounting to Rs. 1,34,54,383/-[Rupees one crore thirty four lakhs fifty four thousand three hundred eighty three] only for the period 2015-2016 should not be demanded and recovered from the petitioner under the proviso to Section 73[1] of the Finance Act, 1994 read with Section 174[2] of the CGST Act, 2017;

[ii] Applicable interest on the amount of unpaid Service Tax should not be demanded and recovered from the petitioner under Section 75 of the Finance Act , 1994.

[iii] Penalty should not be imposed under Section 77 of the Finance Act