This writ petition is filed challenging the notice of tax and penalty under sub-Section 1(b) of Section 129 of the Karnataka Goods and Services Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’, for the sake of brevity) and the Central Goods and Services Act, 2017. On the basis of the said notice, order of demand of tax and penalty has been passed under Section 129(3) of the Act.

2. At the outset, learned Additional Government Advocate submitted that under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Act, 2017, against the impugned order, the petitioner has an alternative and efficacious remedy of appeal before the Appellate Authority. In support of his contention, he has also relied on the order of the Division Bench of this Court in Writ Appeal No.3974/2019, disposed of on 02.12.2019. Hence, he sought for dismissal of the appeal.

3. This position of law is not disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

4. In view of the above since the petitioner has an alternative and efficacious remedy of an appeal, the writ petition is not maintainable.

5. However, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the impugned order has been passed on 10.12.2020, the writ petition has been filed on 25.02.2021, within three months from the date of the order passed by the Authority. Since under Section 107 sub-clause 4, the period of limitation has been prescribed for three months and he has filed the writ petition before this Court, he submitted that the Appellate Authority can dispose of the appeal on merits without going to the limitation.

6. In view of the above, if the petitioner files an appeal before the Appellate Authority within six weeks from today, the Appellate Authority to decide the appeal on merits in accordance with law without going to the limitation aspect. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of.