Extraordinary Jurisdiction Under Article 226 Can’t be Invoked If Assessee Was Not Diligent in Availing Alternate Remedies | HC

Case Details: Jitendra Kumar Pathak v. State of Bihar - [2023] 154 taxmann.com 525 (Patna)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

• • K. Vinod Chandran, CJ. & Partha Sarthy, J.
  • Bachan Jee Ojha, Adv. for the Petitioner.
  • Raghwanand for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

In the present case, the writ petition was filed by the petitioner against the appellate order which was rejected on the ground of delay. The appellate order specifically noticed Section 107 of GST Act, 2017 which permits an appeal to be filed within three months and a further period of one month.

High Court Held

The Honorable High Court noted that the Appellate Authority also took into account the saving of limitation granted by the Hon’ble Supreme Court due to the pandemic situation. The Court further noted that invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 is not a measure to be employed where there are alternate remedies available.

In the instant case, the appeal was filed after 289 days from the date on which even the limitation period, as stipulated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, expired. The petitioner had not been diligent in availing such alternate remedies within the stipulated time. Therefore, the Court held that this petition was liable to be dismissed.