Constitutional remedies in GST :
Our Constitution has maintained a balance between powers of Legislature, Judiciary and Executive. All actions of Government are subject to judicial scrutiny of Supreme Court and High Courts, irrespective of provisions of any particular statute. These judicial powers are conferred by Constitution itself and hence cannot be curtailed by any legislation. Declaration in any Statute that the order shall be final does not affect writ jurisdiction.
Powers of Supreme Court – Article 136 authorises Supreme Court to grant special leave to appeal from any judgment, decree or order in any cause or matter passed or made by any court or Tribunal in India. This is at the discretion of the Supreme Court and applications under this Article are termed as Special Leave Petitions (SLP) as these can be admitted only with special leave (permission) of Supreme Court.
Powers of High Court – High Court, within the territory of its jurisdiction, has powers, vide Article 226 of constitution, to issue orders or writs for enforcement of any fundamental right and for any other purpose. Article 227 confer powers on High Court of superintendence over all courts and Tribunals in the territory in which the High Court has jurisdiction. Thus, Tribunals in a State are subordinate to the High Court of that State and decisions of the High Court are binding on the Tribunal bench sitting in that State. – – In Suprabhat Steels v. CEGAT 2002(144) ELT 500 (Cal HC), it was held that even if Tribunal Bench is located at Kolkata, the Kolkata High Court will not have territorial jurisdiction, when entire cause of action arose outside jurisdiction of Kolkata. [In this case, property was attached in Bihar].
In Kusum Ingots v. UOI 2004 AIR SCW 2766 = AIR 2004 SC 2321 = 168 ELT 3 (SC 3 member bench), it was held that Delhi High Court will not have jurisdiction simply because Parliament has passed Act in Delhi. Unless part of cause of action arises in Delhi, the Delhi High Court will not have jurisdiction. It was also held that if original adjudicating authority is at one place while appellate authority is at other place, both High Courts will have writ jurisdiction. The reason is that original order merges with appellate order and that order is also required to be set aside.
In West Coast Ingots v. CCE (2007) 209 ELT 343 (Del HC DB), it was held that High Court will not exercise writ jurisdiction only because Tribunal has passed order from bench in Delhi, if significant part of action has taken place outside the jurisdiction – same view in Brinda Beverages v. CCE (2009) 237 ELT 658 (Del HC DB).
Norms for invoking special powers – Powers to issue high prerogative writs are extraordinary discretionary powers and hence are to be exercised sparingly and in fit case, on sound principles of law. Courts will invoke writ jurisdiction only in exceptional cases. Thus, when alternate remedy like departmental appeal or ordinary civil suit is available, writ jurisdiction will not be normally invoked.
Appeal should be filed even if writ/SLP is filed – Even if writ petition/SLP is filed, it is highly advisable to file appeal. The reason is that if SLP/writ is dismissed for any reason, the remedy of appeal might become time barred by that time. It is true that in UOI v. West Coast Paper Mills 2004 AIR SCW 838 = 135 STC 265 =164 ELT 375 (SC 3 member bench), it was held that if SLP/writ is admitted, correctness of order appealed against is wide open. In this case, doctrine of merger applies. In this case, it was held that if SLP is admitted, limitation for filing appeal against order of Tribunal would start after writ was dismissed by High Court. – – However, the risk is not worth taking and filing of appeal in time is a must.
High Court can review its orders on merits – High Courts are courts of record under article 215 of Constitution of India. Hence, powers of review. Even under Article 226 of Constitution of India (writ powers), there is no restriction on powers of review by High Court – CIT v. Meghalaya Steels (2015) 377 ITR 112 (SC).