Jharkhand Court Rules on Tata Steel Case

•

Writ Against Section 74 Order Dismissed: Jharkhand High Court Directs Tata Steel to File GST Appeal Tata Steel Limited vs Union of India Jharkhand High Court | W.P. (T) No. 2485 of 2026 | Neutral Citation: 2026:JHHC:11878-DB | Dated: 23-Apr-2026

TL;DR ⚖️ The Assessee challenged the Order-in-Original passed under Section 74 of the CGST Act, 2017, alleging absence of jurisdiction and breach of natural justice. The Jharkhand High Court held that the case involved disputed factual issues and could not be treated as a case of patent lack of jurisdiction or patent violation of natural justice. The Court refused to entertain the writ petition and directed the Assessee to avail the statutory appeal remedy.

Issue Whether the High Court should entertain a writ petition under Article 226 against an Order-in-Original passed under Section 74 of the CGST Act, 2017, when the Assessee had an alternative statutory remedy of appeal, by alleging that the order was without jurisdiction and violated natural justice.

Application The Assessee had challenged the Order-in-Original dated 26.12.2025 passed under Section 74. The Assessee argued that wrongful availment of ITC was not due to fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression to evade tax, and therefore Section 74 itself was wrongly invoked.

The Court held that the show cause notice could not be said to be wholly without jurisdiction, and the proper officer had considered the Assessee’s reply and rejected it on merits. Since the correctness of those findings required factual examination, the same had to be tested in statutory appeal, not in writ proceedings.

Conclusion The writ petition was dismissed, but liberty was granted to the Assessee to file appeal within 4 weeks. If filed within that period after complying with statutory requirements, the Appellate Authority was directed to consider the appeal on merits without rejecting it on limitation.