Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 20199
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A., J
THE NEW HORIZON MOSAICS – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 32499 OF 2024
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.S.JAYAKRISHNAN, SRI.S.PARAMESWARA PRASAD
For the Respondents: SHRI.C.DINESH
Judicial review does not substitute statutory remedy if proper opportunity has been provided.
Headnote:The petitioner challenges an order under Section 73 of the CGST Act regarding the assessment year 2019-2020 citing lack of proper opportunity to be heard. The court found the petitioner had been given such an opportunity, dismissing the writ, but allowing for a later appeal without affecting the limitation period. The petitioner may invoke an appeal against the order, excluding certain days from the limitation calculation.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to assessment order under cgst act. (Para 1) |
| 2. court's observation on opportunity to be heard. (Para 2) |
JUDGMENT
This writ petition is submitted by the petitioner, who is a registered taxpayer under the provisions of the CGST / KSGST Act, 2017. The challenge raised in this writ petition is against Ext.P3, an order passed under Section 73 of the CGST Act, in respect of the assessment year 2019-2020. The challenge raised by the petitioner against the order under by way of the writ petition, instead of invoking the statutory remedy of appeal, is on the ground that the petitioner was not provided with a proper opportunity for being heard and the objections raised by the petitioner are not specifically referred to in the assessment order.
2. A statement has been submitted in response to the averments contained in the writ petition, wherein, it is averred that, the petitioner was provided with an opportunity for being heard on 27.07.2024. Later, on 29.07.2024, the petitioner appeared and handed over a copy of the reply already filed with a new date.
In such circumstances it is seen that the petitioner was granted an opportunity to be heard. Therefore, I do not find any justifiable reason to interfere in the order passed, by invoking the powers of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. In such circumstances, this writ petition is dismissed, without prejudice to the rights of the petitioner to invoke the remedy of appeal against the impugned order. However, it is clarified that the period from 11.09.2024, the date of filing of this writ petition, till the date of receipt of the certified copy of this judgment, shall be excluded while computing the period of limitation for submitting the appeal.
Sd/-
ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.
JUDGE
