2026-VIL-695-DEL

SGST High Court Cases

GST - Exercise of writ jurisdiction, Availability of statutory appellate remedy - Petitioner participated in audit and adjudication proceedings, submitted detailed replies with supporting documentary evidence, agreements, invoices and reconciliations, and participated in personal hearings conducted by the adjudicating authority - Whether the High Court should exercise writ jurisdiction to challenge the adjudication order on the ground that the adjudicating authority did not call for further documents or clarifications before concluding the proceedings - HELD - The existence of an efficacious statutory appellate remedy does not operate as an absolute bar to writ jurisdiction. The High Court may entertain a petition under Article 226 only in exceptional circumstances such as breach of fundamental rights, violation of principles of natural justice, excess of jurisdiction, or a challenge to the vires of a statute or delegated legislation. However, the present case does not disclose any such exceptional circumstance - The contention that the adjudicating authority should have called for further documents before concluding cannot be accepted as an inflexible requirement of natural justice. Once adequate opportunity has been afforded to place all material in support of its case, the adjudicating authority is required to adjudicate on the basis of the record available before it. Whether the material produced was sufficient, whether any further documents ought to have been furnished, and whether the conclusions ultimately drawn are sustainable are all matters touching upon the merits of adjudication and are eminently within the province of the statutory appellate authority - The Writ Petition is dismissed leaving it open to the Petitioner to avail the statutory remedy of appeal

Quick Search

/

Create Account



Log In



Forgot Password


Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page



Feedback this page