Atharvan Minerals Pvt Ltd Vs Union of India thr. its Secretary Ministry of Finance & Ors (Bombay High Court)
In the case of Atharvan Minerals Pvt Ltd Vs Union of India, the Bombay High Court dismissed a petition challenging the requirement for a pre-deposit under the Goods and Services Tax (GST) Act. The petitioners had filed the writ in response to an order from the Joint Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise, contending that they should not be required to make a pre-deposit before appealing the order. The petition highlighted the insolvency of the respondent company as a factor in seeking an exemption from the pre-deposit requirement, which the Court found to be irrelevant to the issue at hand. The petitioners acknowledged that they had an alternative remedy under Section 107 of the CGST Act, which provides for an appeal process, but sought to bypass it due to the pre-deposit obligation.
The Bombay High Court emphasized that the statutory requirement for a pre-deposit could not be circumvented through a writ petition. The Court pointed out that the issue raised was not purely a legal question but involved factual aspects that would require a detailed examination in the appellate process. The Court referred to previous rulings where parties had attempted to bypass statutory remedies to avoid pre-deposit requirements, such as Oberoi Constructions Ltd. v. Union of India and Godrej Sara Lee Ltd. v. Excise & Taxation Officer. In these cases, the Court had stressed that the High Court’s discretionary writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution should not be used to avoid mandatory pre-deposit provisions.
