Facts of the Case

Supreme Food Products approached the High Court of Kerala being aggrieved by two assessment orders passed under the provisions of the GST laws for the assessment years 2017-18 (November to March) and 2018-19.

The record reflected that DRC-01A notice dated 20 February 2020 had been issued for FY 2017-18 and FY 2018-19. Thereafter, DRC-01 notices dated 1 September 2021 were issued separately for FY 2017-18 and FY 2018-19. The petitioner submitted replies dated 7 October 2021 against those notices.

Subsequently, two assessment orders dated 15 November 2021 were passed against the petitioner. The assessment order relating to FY 2017-18 raised a demand of Rs. 15,31,029, while the assessment order relating to FY 2018-19 raised a demand of Rs. 29,75,338.

Aggrieved by these two assessment orders, the petitioner instituted the writ petition before the High Court.

Issues Involved

The principal issues arising for consideration were:

  1. Whether the petitioner could be permitted to discontinue the writ proceedings and avail the statutory appellate remedies against the two GST assessment orders dated 15 November 2021.
  2. Whether the period during which the writ petition remained pending before the High Court could be excluded while determining the limitation period for filing the statutory appeals.
  3. Whether the petitioner could raise all available contentions against the impugned assessment orders before the first appellate authority in accordance with law.

Petitioner’s Arguments

The petitioner submitted before the High Court that it did not wish to pursue the writ petition further and sought permission to avail the statutory remedies against Exts. P8 and P9, namely the two assessment orders dated 15 November 2021.

The petitioner further requested that the period during which the writ petition remained pending before the High Court be excluded for the purpose of determining the limitation period within which the statutory appeals were required to be filed.

Thus, the petitioner sought liberty to challenge the assessment orders before the competent first appellate authority without losing the statutory remedy merely because time had elapsed during the pendency of the writ proceedings.

Respondent’s Arguments

The learned Senior Government Pleader was heard by the High Court.

The judgment does not record any detailed independent objection, counter-argument, or substantive opposition advanced by the respondent against the petitioner’s request to pursue the statutory appellate remedy and seek exclusion of the writ-pendency period for limitation purposes.

Accordingly, no additional respondent argument should be attributed beyond what is expressly recorded in the judgment.

Court Order / Findings

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the submissions made before it, the High Court closed the writ petition.

The Court expressly clarified that the petitioner would be at liberty to raise all contentions against Exts. P8 and P9 by filing statutory appeals before the first appellate authority in accordance with law.

Significantly, the High Court directed that the period from 18 February 2022 to 16 November 2022 be excluded for the purpose of determining the period of limitation within which the statutory appeals were required to be filed.

However, this exclusion was made subject to an express condition: the petitioner was required to file the appeal within one week from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the judgment.

Accordingly, the writ petition was disposed of with liberty to pursue the statutory appellate remedies on the above terms.

Important Clarification

The judgment is important for the following precise clarification:

Where the petitioner chose not to continue with the writ petition and instead sought to pursue the statutory appellate remedy against GST assessment orders, the High Court permitted such a course and excluded the period during which the writ petition remained pending for determining limitation.

However, the benefit was expressly conditional. The statutory appeal had to be filed within one week from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the judgment.

The decision should not be read as laying down an unrestricted proposition that the pendency period of every writ petition must automatically be excluded in all GST appeals. The relief in this case was granted having regard to the facts and circumstances before the Court and subject to the specific filing condition imposed in the judgment.

Sections / Provisions Involved

GST Laws: Assessment proceedings and statutory appellate remedy against assessment orders.

Specific statutory section: The judgment itself does not expressly identify or mention any particular section number of the CGST Act, SGST Act, or other GST enactment governing the assessment orders or statutory appeals. Therefore, no specific section number should be inserted into the case summary as though it were expressly adjudicated in the judgment.

Procedural documents involved: DRC-01A and DRC-01 notices.

Core legal issue: Statutory appellate remedy against GST assessment orders and exclusion of the writ-pendency period while determining limitation for filing appeals.

Link to download the order -https://www.mytaxexpert.co.in/uploads/1783311946_988compressed.pdf

Disclaimer

This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.