Section 107: Dismissal of Writ Petition Due to Statutory Remedy

Facts of the Case:

The petitioner requested the court to quash an ex-parte demand order and show cause notice issued by the Deputy Commissioner, Sector – 9, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, under Section 73 of the SGST Act. A preliminary objection was raised regarding the petition’s maintainability, highlighting that an appeal is available under Section 107 of the GST Act against the impugned order.

Submissions by the Petitioner:-

The petitioner’s counsel referred to an earlier judgment (Eveready Industries India Ltd. Vs. State of U.P.) in which the court highlighted the importance of a personal hearing before issuing an adverse order. The petitioner contended that the show cause notice failed to indicate a date, time, or place for a hearing, effectively denying the opportunity for a personal hearing. The petitioner argued that he had responded to the notice under Section 61, but there was no record of a response to the notice under Section 73 or any request for an extension to submit a reply.

Submissions by the Respondent:-

The submission from the Deputy Commissioner, which indicated that notices were issued under Sections 61 and 73 of the SGST Act, but the petitioner did not respond.

Findings & Decision of the court:-

The court distinguished the current case from the Eveready Industries, noting that the petitioner had not replied to the show cause notice under Section 73.

The court held that it was the duty of the petitioner to respond to the show cause notice. The lack of a specified date, time, or place for a hearing in the notice did not justify ignoring the notice. The court dismissed the writ petition, stating that the petitioner has a statutory remedy available under Section 107 of the Central GST Act.