Dismissed¶27

Vijayalakshmi v. The Deputy Commercial Tax officer 2

Madras HC3 Feb 2025WP(MD)/3114/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

W.P.(MD) No.3114 of 2025, Madras High Court Madurai Bench, Mummineni Sudheer Kumar J., 03.02.2025; writ dismissed on alternative remedy; Section 73 TNGST Act order dated 24.07.2024; appeal liberty under Section 107(1) TNGST/CGST Act; limitation condonation in effect for two-week filing; GST assessment Karur; no costs.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to the petitioner to avail the remedy of appeal before the Appellate Authority within two weeks; such appeal, if filed within the stipulated period, to be entertained without reference to limitation; no costs. ¶27

Vijayalakshmi Vs The Deputy Commercial Tax officer 2 — GST and Indirect Tax | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶27

Issue for consideration

Whether the writ petition challenging the final order dated 24.07.2024 under Section 73 of the TNGST Act should be entertained despite the availability of an effective alternative statutory remedy of appeal under Section 107(1) of the TNGST Act / CGST Act.

¶23

Court's answer

The petitioner's complaint of non-consideration of the representation / explanation dated 11.02.2024 was found to be incorrect, since the first respondent had already passed a detailed order dated 24.07.2024 duly taking the explanation / representation into consideration.

¶21

Ratio / Principle

The Court declined to entertain the writ petition because the petitioner has an effective alternative remedy of appeal under Section 107(1) of the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 / Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.

¶23

Key takeaways

The writ petition was dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal before the Appellate Authority within two weeks; if filed within that stipulated period, the appeal shall be entertained by the Appellate Authority without reference to the period of limitation, and with no costs.ratio¶28

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition (Article 226) seeking certiorari to quash the final order dated 24.07.2024 passed by the first respondent under Section 73 of the TNGST Act was dismissed. The Court found the petitioner's grievance of non-consideration of the explanation dated 11.02.2024 factually incorrect, as a detailed order dated 24.07.2024 (GSTIN 33AOWPV0817QZ0/2022-23) had been passed after considering the explanation. Since the petitioner had an effective alternative remedy under Section 107(1) of the TNGST Act, 2017 / CGST Act, 2017, the petition was dismissed with liberty to appeal before the Appellate Authority within two weeks, such appeal to be entertained without reference to limitation; no costs.

¶1

W.P.(MD) No.3114 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 03.02.2025

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR

¶6

W.P.(MD) No.3114 of 2025

Vijayalakshmi

... Petitioner

-vs-

1.The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer-2 Karur-1 Karur

¶11

2.The Commercial Tax Officer (State Taxes) Karur-1 Karur

¶12

3.The Deputy Commissioner (State Taxes) Karur District Karur

¶13

4.The Deputy Commissioner (State Taxes) Erode Division, Erode ... Respondents

¶14

PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a writ of certiorari to call for the records relating to the impugned final order issued by the first respondent under Section 73 of the TNGST Act, dated 24.07.2024 and quash the same as illegal.

¶15

Page 1 of 4

¶16

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶17

W.P.(MD) No.3114 of 2025

¶18

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Ramaguru For Respondents : Mr.J.K.Jayaseelan Government Advocate

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

Though this writ petition has been filed by the petitioner complaining non-consideration of his representation / explanation dated 11.02.2024, on verification, the same is found to be incorrect as the first respondent has passed a detailed order in GSTIN.

¶21

33AOWPV0817QZ0/2022-23, dated 24.07.2024, duly taking into consideration the explanation / representation submitted by the petitioner. But, the said detailed order is not filed along with this writ petition. However, the same is placed before this Court by the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents.

¶22

2. In view of the same, this Court is not inclined to entertain this

¶23

writ petition, as the petitioner has got an effective alternative remedy under Section 107(1) of the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 / Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.

¶24

Page 2 of 4

¶25

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶26

W.P.(MD) No.3114 of 2025

¶27

3. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed granting liberty to

¶28

the petitioner to avail the remedy of appeal before the Appellate Authority within a period of two weeks from today. Incase if the appeal is filed within the stipulated period of two weeks from today, the same shall be entertained by the Appellate Authority without reference to the period of limitation. No costs.

¶29

03.02.2025

¶30

NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No

¶31

krk

¶32