GST Audit and SCN Challenge Not Maintainable in Writ | HC

  • Blog|News|GST & Customs|
  • 3 Min Read
  • By Taxmann
  • |
  • Last Updated on 25 February, 2026

Latest from Taxmann

GST writ petition

Case Details: KCC Dhangaon Boregaon Expressway (P.) Ltd. vs. Union of India - [2026] 183 taxmann.com 322 (Madhya Pradesh)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

  • Vivek Rusia & Pradeep Mittal, JJ.
  • Harsh Gupta, Adv. for the Petitioner.
  • Gajendra Singh Thakur, Adv. for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

The petitioner, a construction company, was taken under audit by issuance of Form GST ADT-01 and a spot memo. It submitted detailed replies and participated effectively before the competent authority. Subsequently, the final audit report in Form GST ADT-02 was issued, and a personal hearing was conducted, following which a final order under Section 74 of the CGST Act and Madhya Pradesh GST Act was passed. Instead of availing the statutory remedy of appeal, it filed a writ petition challenging the validity of the show cause notice and the audit report on the ground that the final audit report was time-barred. The matter was accordingly placed before the High Court.

High Court Held

The High Court held that the petitioner had effectively participated before the competent authority, and a final order under Section 74 had been passed; therefore, the validity of the show cause notice and the audit report could not be challenged by way of a writ petition. The Court observed that writ petitions under Article 226 against assessment orders are not maintainable, and the statutory remedy of appeal must be availed. All grounds raised by the petitioner were required to be presented before the Appellate Authority under Section 65 read with Section 74 of the CGST Act, with any further remedy lying before the GST Tribunal. The Court accordingly dismissed the writ petition in favour of the Department of Revenue.

List of Cases Reviewed

List of Cases Referred to

  • Shree Bhawani Paper Mills Ltd. v. State of U.P [Writ Petition (Tax) No.255/2012 of 10-9-2015] (para 8)
  • Whilpool Corporation v. Registrar of Trade Marks (1998) 8 SCC 1 (para 9)
  • Isha Beebi v. Tax Recovery Officer (1976) 1 SCC 70 (para 9)
  • Feldohf Auto & Gas Industries Ltd. v. UOI (1998) 9 SCC 710 (para 9)
  • Paradip Port Trust v. Sales Tax Officer 1998 taxmann.com 2004 (SC) (para 9)
  • Star Paper Mills Ltd. v. State of U.P. JT (2006) 12 SC 92 (para 9)
  • State of HP v. Gujarat Ambuja Cement Ltd. 2006 taxmann.com 1823/[2005] 142 STC 1 (SC) (para 9)
  • State of M.P. v. Sanjay Nagaich (2013) 7 SCC 25 (para 9)
  • Southern Electricity Supply Co. of Orissa Ltd. v. Sri Seetaram Rice Mill (2012) 2 SCC 108 (para 9)
  • UOI v. Tantia Construction (P.) Ltd. (2011) 5 SCC 697 (para 9)
  • UOI v. Mangal Textile Mills (I) (P.) Ltd. (2010) 14 SCC 553 (para 9)
  • Godrej Sara Lee Ltd. v. Asstt. Commissioner (AA) (2009) 14 SCC 338 (para 9)
  • Mumtaz Post Graduate Degree College v. University of Lucknow (2009) 2 SCC 630 (para 9)
  • Rajasthan State Electricity Board v. UOI (2008) 5 SCC 632 (para 9)
  • BCPP Mazdoor Sangh v. NTPC (2007) 14 SCC 234 (para 9)
  • Dhampur Sugar Mills Ltd. v. State of U.P. (2007) 8 SCC 338 (para 9)
  • M.P. State Agro Industries Development Corpn. Ltd. v. Jahan Khan (2007) 10 SCC 88 (para 9)
  • A.V. Venkateswaran v. Ramchand Sobhraj Wadhwani 1961 taxmann.com 4/[1983] 13 ELT 1327 (SC) (para 9)
  • Himmatlal Harilal Mehta v. State of Madhya Pradesh AIR 1954 SC 403 (para 9)
  • Collector of Customs and Excise, Cochin v. A.S. Bava AIR 1968 SC 13 (para 9)
  • L.K. VERMA v. H.M.T. Ltd. 2006 taxmann.com 2325/[2006] 108 FLR 1101 (SC) (para 9)
  • State of Tripura v. Manoranjan Chakraborty (2001) 10 SCC 740 (para 9)
  • Guruvayur Devasworn Managing Committee v. C.K. Rajan (2003) 7 SCC 546 (para 9)
  • State of Maharashtra v. Greatship (India) Ltd. [2022] 142 taxmann.com 417 (SC) (para 10).

Disclaimer: The content/information published on the website is only for general information of the user and shall not be construed as legal advice. While the Taxmann has exercised reasonable efforts to ensure the veracity of information/content published, Taxmann shall be under no liability in any manner whatsoever for incorrect information, if any.

Taxmann Publications has a dedicated in-house Research & Editorial Team. This team consists of a team of Chartered Accountants, Company Secretaries, and Lawyers. This team works under the guidance and supervision of editor-in-chief Mr Rakesh Bhargava.

The Research and Editorial Team is responsible for developing reliable and accurate content for the readers. The team follows the six-sigma approach to achieve the benchmark of zero error in its publications and research platforms. The team ensures that the following publication guidelines are thoroughly followed while developing the content:

  • The statutory material is obtained only from the authorized and reliable sources
  • All the latest developments in the judicial and legislative fields are covered
  • Prepare the analytical write-ups on current, controversial, and important issues to help the readers to understand the concept and its implications
  • Every content published by Taxmann is complete, accurate and lucid
  • All evidence-based statements are supported with proper reference to Section, Circular No., Notification No. or citations
  • The golden rules of grammar, style and consistency are thoroughly followed
  • Font and size that’s easy to read and remain consistent across all imprint and digital publications are applied

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

«
»

Everything on Tax and Corporate Laws of India

To subscribe to our weekly newsletter please log in/register on Taxmann.com

Author: Taxmann

Taxmann Publications has a dedicated in-house Research & Editorial Team. This team consists of a team of Chartered Accountants, Company Secretaries, and Lawyers. This team works under the guidance and supervision of editor-in-chief Mr Rakesh Bhargava.

The Research and Editorial Team is responsible for developing reliable and accurate content for the readers. The team follows the six-sigma approach to achieve the benchmark of zero error in its publications and research platforms. The team ensures that the following publication guidelines are thoroughly followed while developing the content:

  • The statutory material is obtained only from the authorized and reliable sources
  • All the latest developments in the judicial and legislative fields are covered
  • Prepare the analytical write-ups on current, controversial, and important issues to help the readers to understand the concept and its implications
  • Every content published by Taxmann is complete, accurate and lucid
  • All evidence-based statements are supported with proper reference to Section, Circular No., Notification No. or citations
  • The golden rules of grammar, style and consistency are thoroughly followed
  • Font and size that's easy to read and remain consistent across all imprint and digital publications are applied