AGARWAL TIMBER SUPPLIERS Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Piyush Garg, learned counsel for the appellant-writ petitioner, Mr. C.S. Rawat, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State Government, Mr. V.K. Kapruwan, learned Standing Counsel for the Uttarakhand Forest Development Corporation and, with their consent, the Special Appeal is disposed of at the stage of admission.

(2.) This intra-Court appeal is preferred by the appellant-writ petitioner aggrieved by the order passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition (M/S) No. 2190 of 2019 dated 31.07.2019, whereby the learned Single Judge dismissed the Writ Petition on the ground of alternative remedy.

(3.) The appellant-writ petitioner purchased timber from the Uttarakhand Forest Development Corporation, a statutory Corporation created under Section 3 of the Uttar Pradesh Forest Corporation Act, 1974. The invoice raised by the Uttarakhand Forest Development Corporation (for short "the Corporation"?), on the appellant-writ petitioner, is said to be a tax invoice, meaning thereby that both CGST and SGST were charged on the sale price of the goods. The appellant-writ petitioner claims to have paid the said amount to the Corporation even before the goods were transported. It is the appellant-writ petitioner's case that it is the Corporation which, instead of raising two separate e-way bills for two separate consignments, had raised one e-way bill for the total amount on both the consignments.