The High Court declined to exercise writ jurisdiction due to inordinate delay and the availability of alternative remedies, emphasizing that delays lead to injustice and that statutory authorities should first adjudicate factual disputes.

ORDER :

1. In the garb of challenging order dated 21^st August, 2024 passed by the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Dhenkanal Circle, Angul, Odisha-opposite party no.2 under Section 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Odisha Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (collectively be called “the GST Act”) for the tax periods from April, 2019 to March, 2020, the petitioner craves to question the exercise of power under Section 168A to issue Notification No.09/2023-Central Tax, dated 31^st March, 2023 vide Annexure-6 and Notification No.56/2023-Central Tax, dated 28^th December, 2023 vide Annexure-7 by the Government of India in Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue) Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs extending the period of limitation to pass an order under Section 73 by way of filing this writ petition invoking provisions under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India.

2. Facts as adumbrated by the writ petitioner reveals that upon scrutiny of returns filed by the petitioner-assessee under Section 39 of the GST Act, in response to notice dated 18.03.2021 in GST ASMT-10 on the allegation of understatement of tax liability in terms of facts and figures disclosed in Form GSTR-3B as against Form GSTR-1, the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Dhenkanal Circle, Angul, Odisha-opposite party no.2 a reply in Form GST ASMT-11 under Section 61 was submitted on 30.06.2021 and payment made in Form GST DRC-03 contemplated under Rule 142(2) and Rule 142(3) was also furnished. Nevertheless, a show cause notice dated 18.05.2024 in Form DRC-01 was issued invoking Section 73 . In absence of any reply, the adjudicating authority proceeded to pass order dated 18.05.2024. Accordingly, a summary of the order dated 21.08.2024 in Form GST DCR-07 was also issued directing the petitioner to make payment of Tax of Rs.14,27,419.56, interest of Rs.10,48,156.14 and penalty of Rs.1,42,741.96 by the Assistant State Tax Officer, Dhenkanal Circle, Angul.

2.1. Said order is under challenged in the present writ petition on the premise that the said adjudication order is hit by limitation contained under Section 73 (10) of the GST Act, notwithstanding such statutory period has been extended from time to time in exercise of powers under Section 168A of the GST Act by virtue of Notifications dated 31st March, 2023 and 28th December, 2023 under Annexures-6 & 7 respectively.

3. Mr. Madhab Lal Agarwal along with Ms. Zenish Mary Wallace, learned Advocates appearing for the petitioner submitted that the order impugned cannot be sustained inasmuch as the statutory period of limitation specified under Section 73 of the GST Act could not be extended by virtue of Notifications issued under Section 168A of the GST Act.

4. Mr. Sunil Mishra, learned Standing Counsel for CT &GST Department along with Mr. Avinash Kedia, learned Junior Standing Counsel for Central Excise, GST and Customs Department unison submitted that the petitioner has alternative remedy to challenge the order dated 21st August, 2024, but circumventing such remedy, the petitioner should not have approached this Court straightway by way of this writ petition on the specious plea that the authority concerned has transgressed his power under Section 73 (10) read with Notifications issued under Section 168A of the GST Act.

4.1. Laying emphasis on the pleading contained at Ground no.‘S’ of paragraph-18 of the writ petition it is submitted that the mistake in the claim of exemption/tax free transactions in returns has been admitted by the petitioner. Therefore, he fervently prayed not to entertain this writ petition, as adjudication on facts needs to be resolved by the authorities vested with power under the GST Act and Rules thereunder.

5. Heard Mr.