The Kerala High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging GST recovery, ruling that a taxpayer cannot remain silent during adjudication and later approach the court when recovery proceedings begin.
Kerala HC Upholds GST Recovery Against Satwa Solutions
The Kerala High Court has upheld GST recovery proceedings initiated against Satwa Solutions, rejecting the taxpayer's writ challenge on the ground that it failed to contest the assessment notice at the appropriate statutory stage under Sections 73 or 74 of the CGST Act, 2017.
The petitioner sought to quash the recovery notice issued under Section 79, arguing that the demand was time-barred and improperly raised. However, the court emphasized the principle of statutory pre-decisional hearing, noting that the GST regime provides a structured opportunity for the taxpayer to respond to show-cause notices. By remaining silent during adjudication, the petitioner forfeited its right to later contest the validity of the demand.
"The taxpayer who chooses to remain mute when the law affords an opportunity to be heard cannot invoke constitutional jurisdiction as a substitute for statutory appeal or response,"the court stated. It reiterated that writ jurisdiction under Article 226 is not a second chance to correct self-created delays or omissions.
The judgment underscores the importance of timely engagement in GST proceedings. Legal practitioners must advise clients to respond to all show-cause notices, even if intending to challenge jurisdiction or limitation, to preserve legal remedies and avoid upholding of ex parte orders.
