SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(P&H) 863

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
G.S. SANDHAWALIA, LAPITA BANERJI, JJ.
Fayiz Nangaparambill – Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana & Ors. – Respondents
CWP-13130 of 2023
Decided On : 15-01-2024

Advocates Appeared:
Mr. Abhilaksh Grover, Advocate; For the Petitioner
Mr. Sharan Sethi, Addl. A.G., Haryana.

The court will not entertain writ petitions against show cause notices, emphasizing the necessity of pursuing statutory remedies as per the relevant tax laws.

Headnote:(A) Haryana Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017 - Section 129(1) - Central Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017 - Section 20 of the Integrated Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017 - Challenge to detention order in Form GST MOV-06 - Penalty of Rs. 6,22,250/- imposed for non-involvement in the business of areca nuts - Petitioner can approach authorities to deposit penalty for release of goods - Court emphasizes the availability of statutory remedy of appeal. (Paras 1, 3, 4, 5)

(B) Writ Jurisdiction - The court reiterates that it is not for the High Court to entertain writ petitions against show cause notices issued, as per the ruling in The State of Punjab v. Shiv Enterprises & others, 2023 (96) GST 120. (Para 4)

Facts of the case:
The writ petition challenges a detention order under the Haryana Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017, concerning a penalty imposed on the petitioner for not being involved in the business of areca nuts. The petitioner has since deposited the penalty and the goods have been released.

Findings of Court:
The court finds that the authorities acted within statutory provisions and the petitioner has the right to pursue an appeal.

Issues: The main issue addressed is whether the High Court should entertain a writ petition against a show cause notice.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that it is not within its jurisdiction to entertain such writ petitions, emphasizing the importance of following statutory remedies.

Result: Writ petition disposed of with liberty to avail alternative remedy.

JUDGMENT

Mr. G.S. Sandhawalia, J. (Oral)

Challenge in the present Writ petition, filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India is to the detention order in Form GST MOV-06 (Annexure P-1) passed by respondent No.3 under Section 129(1) of the Haryana Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017 and Central Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017 read with Section 20 of the Integrated Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017.

2. The following order was passed on 05.07.2023:

    "Learned State counsel has informed that after retention of the goods, final order has been passed on 30.05.2023 and penalty of Rs. 6,22,250/- has been imposed. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner can approach the concerned authorities and deposit the penalty and thereafter, the goods may be released. In view of the said fact, the authorized representative of the petitioner will approach the respondent authority on 06.07.2023 and after complying with the above said condition of the impugned order, the goods in question be released.

    Adjourned to 15.01.2024."

3. State Counsel has placed on record the photocopy of order dated 21.07.2023 wherein the deposit of Rs. 6,22,250/- has been made on 08.07.2023 by the petitioner being the proprietor of M/s N.P. Traders. The goods being areca nuts (supari) have been released and handed over to authorized persons. The release order dated 08.07.2023 has also been placed on record apart from the fact that an order has already been passed on 30.05.2023 imposing the penalty on the ground that the petitioner-firm was not involved in the business of areca nuts and that both the firms were not involved in the business of supply of areca nuts but were engaged in the business of stationary items etc.

4. In such circumstances, once the authorities have already passed the order as per the statutory provisions it would be open to the petitioner to avail his statutory remedy of appeal under the provisions of the Act. The Apex Court in The State of Punjab v. Shiv Enterprises & others, 2023 (96) GST 120 held that it is not for this Court to entertain the Writ petitions against the show cause notice issued.

5. Keeping in view the above, we dispose of the present Writ petition with liberty to the petitioner to avail of his alternative remedy in accordance with law, within a period of 4 weeks from today.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top