WPMS/394/2024
2024 Latest Caselaw 105 UK

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 105 UK
Judgement Date : 20 February, 2024

Uttarakhand High Court

WPMS/394/2024 on 20 February, 2024

Author: Rakesh Thapliyal

Bench: Rakesh Thapliyal

                     Office Notes,
                    reports, orders
SL.                or proceedings or
         Date                                        COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No                  directions and
                   Registrar's order
                    with Signatures
C     20.02.2024                       WPMS No. 394 of 2024
                                       Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J.

1. Mr. Pulak Raj Mullick, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Mohit Maulekhi, learned Brief Holder for the State.

2. The petitioner is challenging the order dated 24.11.2023 along with the copy of DRC-07 and DRC-01. In addition to this, a further writ of mandamus is being sought for directing respondent No. 3 to allow the refund of Rs. 3,23,346/-, deposited under protest vide treasury challan dated 24.11.2023, followed by release of goods by MOV-05 dated 24.11.2023.

3. It is submitted by Mr. Pulak Raj Mullick, learned counsel for the petitioner that the order dated 24.11.2023 has been passed in flagrant violation of Section 129(4) of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 since no opportunity of hearing was given to the petitioner.

4. Mr. Mohit Maulekhi, learned Brief Holder for the State submits that there is an alternative remedy to prefer an Appeal under Section 107 of the Act.

5. In response to this, Mr. Pulak Raj Mullick, learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Whirlpool Corporation Vs. Registrar of Trade Marks, Mumbai and others; (1999) 8 SCC 1, as well as the judgment as rendered by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of M/s Vivaa Tradecom Pvt. Ltd. and 1 others Vs. State of Gujarat and 1 others, 2021 (44) G.S.T.L 118 and submits that since no opportunity of being heard has been given to the petitioner which is the mandate of Section 129(4) of the Act and as such alternative remedy will not come in to his way since there is no absolute bar.

6. Learned Brief Holder prays for and is granted four weeks' time to file counter affidavit. Two weeks' time, thereafter, is given to the petitioner to file rejoinder affidavit.

7. List this matter on 23.04.2024.

(Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 20.02.2024 Mahinder/