Facts of the Case

The writ-applicant, M/S Kapson Iron And Steel LLP, challenged an order passed by the Proper Officer in Form GST DRC-07 dated 29.12.2021, raising a grievance, among others, that it was not granted an opportunity of personal hearing before the order was passed. The extracted text of this oral order is brief and does not disclose the underlying tax period, the amount demanded, the GSTIN, or the specific allegations against the writ-applicant; it proceeds directly to the question of whether the writ application should be entertained in view of the statutory appellate remedy available under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether a writ court should entertain a challenge to an order passed in Form GST DRC-07 when a statutory appeal under Section 107 of the CGST Act is available.
  2. Whether an alleged breach of natural justice (denial of personal hearing) before passing the impugned order justifies bypassing the statutory appellate remedy.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • The writ-applicant challenged the order passed in Form GST DRC-07 dated 29.12.2021, its principal recorded grievance being that no opportunity of personal hearing was given before the order was passed.
  • The extracted order does not set out any further submissions in detail; the remaining contentions were left to be canvassed before the appellate authority rather than being elaborated in this order.

Respondent's Arguments

  • The extracted order does not record any specific submissions advanced on behalf of the State respondents; the order proceeds directly to disposal on the ground of availability of an alternate statutory remedy.

Court Order / Findings

  • The Court held that the impugned order passed in Form GST DRC-07 dated 29.12.2021 is an appealable order under Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017.
  • It declined to entertain the writ application solely on the ground that the writ-applicant had a statutory remedy available in the form of an appeal.
  • All contentions raised in the writ application, including the grievance that no personal hearing was given before the impugned order was passed, were left to be canvassed before the appellate authority, which was directed to keep this aspect in mind.
  • If an appeal is filed, the appellate authority was directed to take it up for hearing and dispose of it within two months from the date of registration, on its own merits; the Court clarified that it had not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.

Important Clarification

  • A writ court will ordinarily decline to entertain a challenge to an order under Form GST DRC-07 where an efficacious statutory appellate remedy under Section 107 of the CGST Act is available.
  • Even a grievance of denial of personal hearing can be raised before, and is required to be examined by, the appellate authority itself; it does not automatically entitle the assessee to bypass the appeal route.
  • High Courts commonly couple such relegation with a direction for time-bound disposal of the appeal (here, two months from registration) to mitigate the hardship of being sent to the appellate forum.

Sections Involved

  • Section 107, Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 – appeal to the appellate authority against orders of the proper officer.
  • Form GST DRC-07, Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 – summary of the order raising a demand against the taxable person.
  • Article 226, Constitution of India – writ jurisdiction invoked and declined in favour of the statutory remedy.

Decision – In Favour of

The writ application was disposed of on grounds of maintainability, without any finding on merits. The Court did not rule in favour of either the Assessee or the Department on the substantive dispute; it relegated the writ-applicant to the statutory appellate remedy under Section 107, directing that the appellate authority consider all grounds — including the personal-hearing grievance — and dispose of any appeal within two months.

Related Case Laws

No related case laws are available on this site at present.

Case Details

  • Court: High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad
  • Case No.: R/Special Civil Application No. 6737 of 2022
  • Coram: Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice Nisha M. Thakore
  • Date of Order: 13.04.2022

Link to Download the Order

Download the full judgment (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.