Case Summary
Case Title: Mahindra & Mahindra Limited v. Union of India & Ors.
Court: High Court of Chhattisgarh, Bilaspur
Petition No.: Writ Petition (Tax) No. 42 of 2024
Category of Dispute: Input Tax Credit (ITC) – challenge to reversal of ITC
Date of Judgment: 21 March 2024
Relevant Sections: Section 61, Section 73, Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017
Facts (Para 4–5)
The petitioner, Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd., filed a writ petition challenging the order dated 29.12.2023 passed by the Joint Commissioner of State Tax, Raipur. The order directed reversal/payment of alleged excess ITC claimed by the company. The petitioner contended that the order was passed without granting adequate opportunity of hearing and hence violated principles of natural justice.
Questions Before the Court (Para 4–7)
-
Whether the impugned ITC reversal order under Section 73 could be challenged directly through a writ petition?
-
Whether lack of proper hearing rendered the order unsustainable in law?
-
Whether the writ petition was maintainable in light of the appellate remedy under Section 107 of the CGST Act?
Observations (Para 8–10)
The Court observed that:
-
The impugned order was passed after scrutiny of returns under Section 61 and finalized under Section 73 of the CGST Act.
-
The GST law provides a clear appellate mechanism under Section 107 for an aggrieved taxpayer.
-
Without availing this alternative remedy, the petitioner invoked the extraordinary jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226, which is not permissible unless exceptional circumstances exist (such as violation of fundamental rights or lack of jurisdiction).
Judgment (Para 10–11)
The Court dismissed the writ petition, holding that the petitioner had an efficacious alternative remedy of filing an appeal before the appellate authority under Section 107 of the CGST Act. However, liberty was reserved for the petitioner to pursue such remedy in accordance with law.
Table of Precedents Referred
| Case | Court | Ratio / Verdict |
|---|---|---|
| No external cases cited in this judgment | – | – |
Between Fine Lines (Practical Takeaway)
This judgment reinforces that taxpayers cannot bypass the statutory appellate mechanism under Section 107 of the CGST Act and directly file writ petitions in High Courts against adjudication orders under Section 73. Only in rare situations—such as jurisdictional error or breach of fundamental rights—will writ jurisdiction be exercised. Businesses must be prepared to contest ITC reversal orders before the first appellate authority instead of seeking immediate High Court relief.
Disclaimer – “The above summary is for academic purpose only; not formal legal opinion. Seek professional opinion before application. Author or publisher or website shall not be responsible for any usage in any form.”
