Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
Harish Tandon, Murahari Sri Raman
Auroglobal Comtrade Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Joint Commissioner, Goods and Service Tax and Central Excise – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of refund claim process and notices. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments regarding the validity of show cause notice. (Para 3) |
| 3. judicial analysis of authority under gst regarding refund. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 4. conclusion of the court's ruling on the notices. (Para 6) |
| 5. final decision of the court. (Para 7) |
JUDGMENT :
Craving to invoke extraordinary jurisdiction under the provisions of Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India against issue of Demand-cum-Show Cause Notice dated 25.09.2025 in Form GST DRC-01 (“DSCN”, hereinafter referred to) for adjudication under Section 73 and levy of interest under Section 50 coupled with imposition of penalty under Section 122 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017/the Odisha Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (for brevity, “GST Act”), and Summary of Show Cause Notice in Form GST DRC-01 dated 28.10.2025, the writ petition is filed with the prayer(s) for grant of following relief(s):
(a) Issue a Rule NISI in the nature of Writ of Mandamus and/or any other appropriate Writ/Writs calling upon the opposite parties along with records to show cause;
(c) Why the action of the opposite parties shall not be declared as illegal, unjust
A quasi-judicial authority cannot initiate proceedings on issues already adjudicated by a higher authority, thus reinforcing the principles of administrative discipline and the finality of appellate ....
Taxpayer cannot face dual proceedings by Central and State authorities on the same subject-matter under Section 6(2)(b) of the GST Act, establishing a safeguard against double taxation.
The doctrine of functus officio limits a quasi-judicial authority's ability to revisit final decisions, ensuring stability and judicial discipline in legal adjudications.
The appellate authority cannot revise its earlier determinations without new grounds, upholding the principle of functus officio in tax matters.
The Writ Court reaffirms the necessity to pursue statutory remedies provided under the GST Act before seeking divorce from these provisions, emphasizing compliance with appeal conditions.
The court ruled that failure to grant a personal hearing constitutes a violation of natural justice, but requires parties to exhaust alternative remedies provided under the statutory framework before....
The failure to provide valid notice and opportunity to be heard constitutes a violation of natural justice, necessitating quashing of ex parte orders under the GST Act.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
