Writ petition dismissed as delayed challenge to GST assessment held not maintainable due to existence of statutory appeal remedy under Section 107 and deemed service through GST portal

Case Title: M/s Bikash Panigrahi v. Commissioner of Commercial Tax & GST, Orissa High Court
Court: Orissa High Court, Cuttack
Petition No.: W.P.(C) No.12755 of 2025
Category: Maintainability of writ petition under Section 74 — Alternative remedy under Section 107
Date of Judgment: 15 July 2025
Relevant Sections: Sections 74, 107 & 169 of the CGST/OGST Acts 2017

Facts (Paras 2 – 4)

The petitioner, a proprietorship firm “M/s Bikash Panigrahi”, was issued a show cause notice dated 27 November 2020 under Section 74 of the CGST/OGST Acts for FY 2018-19. Having not replied, the Deputy Commissioner, Bargarh Circle, passed an assessment order dated 7 February 2022, creating a demand of ₹ 7,13,705 (Form DRC-07). The petitioner invoked Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution challenging the order as arbitrary, passed without hearing, and without any fraudulent intent. Alternatively, he prayed for leave to file a belated statutory appeal.

Questions before the Court (Para 5)

Whether a writ petition filed more than three years after an assessment order under Section 74 can be entertained when an appeal remedy under Section 107 existed but was not pursued within limitation or even condonable time?

Observations (Paras 6 – 6.6)

• Delay and Laches: The Court noted that the petitioner admitted receiving the show-cause notice on the GST portal. Therefore, knowledge and service were established under Section 169(1)(d).

• Limitation under Section 107: The Act allows appeal within 3 months plus a further condonable 30 days. Filing the writ in April 2025, over three years later, exceeded even the outer statutory limit.

• Precedents Applied:

  • Godrej Sara Lee Ltd. v. Excise & Taxation Officer (2023) 3 SCR 871 – alternative remedy bars writ maintainability.

  • Tata Steel Ltd. v. Raj Kumar Banerjee (2025 INSC 639) – strict adherence to statutory timelines; delay beyond condonable period fatal.

  • Rahul Spares Pvt Ltd. v. Chief Commissioner of CT & GST (W.P.(C) 9373/2025) – upload on GST portal equals valid service; belated challenge rejected.

  • Laxmi Construction v. STO, Barbil (W.P.(C) 9545/2024) – following Glaxo Smith Kline Consumer Healthcare Ltd. (2020) 4 SCR 602, writs filed after expiry of appeal limitation not maintainable.

  Collectively, these authorities establish that the High Court cannot extend limitation or entertain writs circumventing the legislative intent of Section 107.

Judgment (Paras 7 – 8)

The Court held that:

• The petitioner failed to explain three-year delay in filing the writ.

• Service via GST portal constitutes deemed service.

• Once the condonable period under Section 107(4) expires, no writ jurisdiction can revive the appeal right.

Accordingly, the writ petition was dismissed as not maintainable and sans merit, with pending interlocutory applications also dismissed.

Summary of Cited Cases

Between Fine Lines

For taxpayers, this ruling re-emphasizes that appeals under Section 107 must be filed within 3 months + 30 days, failing which writ jurisdiction cannot be invoked as a substitute. Deemed service on GST portal triggers limitation, so taxpayers must vigilantly track portal communications and act promptly.