Apollo Tyres Limited Vs Union of India (Bombay High Court)
Bombay High Court held that court cannot entertain petition for a writ under Article 226 of the Constitution as petitioner has an alternative remedy that provides an equally efficacious remedy without being unduly onerous.
Facts- The show cause notice is issued for the determination of the value of the supply as per Section 15(3)(b) of the CGST Act, 2017, which provides that the value of the supply shall not include any discount given after the supply has been effected subject to fulfilment of conditions specified therein. In the show cause notice, a specific allegation is made on suppressing facts and misstatement regarding non-furnishing details of outward supplies u/s. 37 of the CGST Act. There is also an allegation that the facts have been suppressed with the intention to evade the payment of GST.
By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the show cause notice issued by respondent no.2 to the petitioner to centralise and show cause before respondent no.3 why CGST, SGST and IGST should not be demanded and recovered u/s. 74 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act (CGST), State Goods and Services Tax Act (SGST) and Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act (IGST).
