Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases GST GST + HC GST - 2020 (8) TMI HC This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2020 (8) TMI 872 - HC - GST


Issues:
Challenge to rejection order of appeal under AP GST Act, 2017 and AP GST Rules, 2017 based on non-adherence to provisions in Section 107 and Rule 108.

Analysis:
The High Court of Andhra Pradesh heard a writ petition challenging the rejection order of the learned Appellate Joint Commissioner (ST), Vijayawada, concerning the petitioner's appeal. The rejection was based on the petitioner's alleged failure to comply with the provisions of Section 107 of the AP GST Act, 2017, and Rule 108 of the AP GST Rules, 2017. The petitioner, a registered dealer under the Goods & Service Tax Act, 2017, had filed a statutory appeal against the assessment proceedings conducted by the 1st respondent. The appeal was initially submitted electronically on the GST Portal but was deemed invalid. Subsequently, the petitioner sent the appeal in physical form through courier, which was rejected without providing an opportunity to be heard. The petitioner contended that filing the appeal online was optional as per Rule 108 and cited a previous judgment where a similar situation was allowed by the Court.

The Court examined Rule 108 of the GST Rules, which governs appeals to the Appellate Authority. As per the Rule, an appeal under Section 107 should be filed in FORM GST APL-1 along with relevant documents, either electronically or as notified by the Commissioner. Referring to a previous case, the Court emphasized the importance of prioritizing substantial justice over technicalities. In that case, the Court allowed the petition and set aside the rejection order, directing the authority to entertain the appeal and pass appropriate orders after providing an opportunity for a personal hearing. Given the similarity of issues with the previous case, the Court in the present writ petition followed the same approach. The rejection order was set aside, and the 2nd respondent was directed to consider the petitioner's appeal in accordance with the law, ensuring a personal hearing opportunity.

In conclusion, the writ petition was allowed, and the rejection order was overturned. The 2nd respondent was instructed to process the petitioner's appeal while adhering to the legal procedure and granting a personal hearing. No costs were awarded, and any pending miscellaneous petitions were to be closed accordingly.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates