M/S Ashok Auto Sales Limited v. Union Of India And 2 Others
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
Accordingly, the present petition stands disposed of leaving it open to
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 88. Accordingly, the present petition stands disposed of leaving it open to the petitioner to contest the adjudication proceeding, if any, on its own merits. It is made clear that we have not gone into the merits of the issues and all issues may remain…
Judgment
: Atul Gupta, Prakhar Saran Srivastava, Tarun Agrawal Counsel for Respondent(s) : A.S.G.I., Dhananjay Awasthi, Saumitra Singh Court No. - 3 HON'BLE SAUMITRA DAYAL SINGH, J. HON'BLE INDRAJEET SHUKLA, J.
Heard Shri Atul Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner; Shri Saumitra Singh, learned counsel for the Union and, Shri Dhananjay Awasthi, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 2 and 3.
Challenge has been raised to the adjudication notice dated 27.06.2025 issued under Section 76 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.
Submissions have been advanced that the impugned notice is contrary to a letter issued by Director General of GST Intelligence and also inconsistent to the earlier view entertained with respect to same commodity under the Scheme of the Central Excise Act. In that regard, reliance has been placed on the decision of the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune-I vs Bajaj Auto Ltd., (2015) 325 ELT 465.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the revenue would contend, there is no jurisdictional error in issuance of the show cause notice. Opportunity of hearing was provided to the petitioner. Therefore, no indulgence may be offered under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Petition may be relegated to the forum of alternative remedy.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, without making any observation as may affect the final adjudication on merits and leaving it open to the petitioner to raise all 2 WTAX No. 3345 of 2025 issues, if so advised, at present, fact issues may require consideration of evidence before any firm inference may be drawn in law.
In the above context, petitioner has an adequate remedy with liberty to represent it's case before the adjudicating authority under the statutory scheme.
In view of the above, interference claimed is declined.
Operative part
Accordingly, the present petition stands disposed of leaving it open to the petitioner to contest the adjudication proceeding, if any, on its own merits. It is made clear that we have not gone into the merits of the issues and all issues may remain open to be tested on their own merits, during adjudication. October 15, 2025 Prakhar (Indrajeet Shukla,J.) (Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.) PRAKHAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, the present petition stands disposed of leaving it open to
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 — s. 76; Central Excise Act; Constitution of India — art. 226.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.