Jaitron Communication Pvt. Ltd. VS State Of U.P

This petition has been lodged under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, directly contesting the order issued by the Proper Authority and the first appellate authority, while exercising jurisdiction pursuant to Section 129 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (CGST Act). This course of action has been pursued as the Goods and Services Tax (GST) Tribunal has not yet been established by the Central Government for the State of Uttar Pradesh. The petitioner argues that their statutory right to approach the Tribunal cannot be deprived once the Act itself has been put into effect.

The petitioner draws the attention of the Court to Sections 112(3) and 113(1) of the CGST Act, which delineate the jurisdiction of the CGST Tribunal. These provisions are highlighted to underscore the importance of establishing the Tribunal and ensuring access to its jurisdiction as per the statutory framework outlined in the Act.

This petition has been brought forth under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, directly contesting the order issued by both the Proper Authority and the first appellate authority, exercising jurisdiction under Section 129 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (CGST Act). This course of action is pursued due to the absence of a Goods and Services Tax (GST) Tribunal established by the Central Government for the State of Uttar Pradesh.

The petitioner asserts that their statutory right to approach the Tribunal should not be denied once the CGST Act has been enacted. The attention of the Court is drawn to Section 112(3) and 113(1) of the Act, which delineate the jurisdiction of the CGST Tribunal. These sections are quoted as follows:

“112(3): The Commissioner may, on his own motion, or upon request from the Commissioner of State tax or Commissioner of Union territory tax, call for and examine the record of any order passed by the Appellate Authority or the Revisional Authority under this Act or the State Goods and Services Tax Act or the Union Territory Goods and Services Tax Act for the purpose of satisfying himself as to the legality or propriety of the said order and may, by order, direct any officer subordinate to him to apply to the Appellate Tribunal within six months from the date on which the said order has been passed for determination of such points arising out of the said order as may be specified by the Commissioner in his order.”

The petitioner argues that the absence of a functioning GST Tribunal in Uttar Pradesh should not hinder their access to the appellate process, especially given the provisions outlined in Section 112(3) and 113(1) of the CGST Act. They contend that the Commissioner retains the authority to examine orders passed by the Appellate Authority or Revisional Authority and can direct subordinate officers to apply to the Appellate Tribunal for resolution of pertinent issues arising from those orders.

In essence, the petitioner seeks to uphold their right to judicial recourse as guaranteed by the CGST Act, despite the current absence of a GST Tribunal in their jurisdiction. They argue that the provisions within the Act itself empower the Commissioner to ensure access to the appellate process, thereby underscoring the importance of judicial review and safeguarding the rights of taxpayers

The petition at hand is brought forth under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, challenging the order issued by the Proper Authority and the first appellate authority. This challenge is made within the framework of Section 129 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (CGST Act), primarily because the Goods and Services Tax (GST) Tribunal has not yet been established by the Central Government for the State of Uttar Pradesh.

The petitioner argues that their statutory right to approach the Tribunal cannot be denied, especially since the CGST Act is already in force. They draw attention to Sections 112(3) and 113(1) of the Act, which delineate the jurisdiction of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Tribunal.

Section 112(3) empowers the Commissioner to review orders passed by the Appellate Authority or the Revisional Authority under the Act or related state or union territory tax acts. The Commissioner can direct subordinate officers to apply to the Appellate Tribunal within six months for the determination of specific points arising from these orders.

Similarly, Section 113(1) grants the Appellate Tribunal the authority to hear appeals and pass appropriate orders after giving parties an opportunity to be heard. This may include confirming, modifying, or annulling the decision or order appealed against, or referring the case back to the relevant authority for fresh adjudication or decision with specific directions, including the possibility of taking additional evidence.

In essence, the petitioner contends that their right to appeal to the CGST Tribunal cannot be curtailed, and they rely on the provisions of Sections 112(3) and 113(1) to support their position, emphasizing the importance of statutory mechanisms for dispute resolution within the framework of the GST regime.

Download PDF:

For Reference Visit
Allahabad High Court 

Read Another Case Law:
GST Case Law