2022 (12) TMI 1372 - HC - GST

Interest on delayed payment vide Section 50(1) of Central Goods and Services Act, 2017 - HELD THAT - In the case on hand, Revenue has pegged interest at Rs.8,29,955/-, but it is disputed by the petitioner-assessee. The following order is passed a) Writ petitioner to demonstrate to the satisfaction of Respondents 1 and 2 undisputed payments (if any) within three weeks from today i.e., on or before 29.12.2022; b) On demonstration to the satisfaction of respondents 1 and 2 (as above), the impugned notice will stand set aside; c) If the aforesaid demonstration is not made on or before 29.12.2022, the writ petition will stand dismissed and the impugned notice will continue to operate without any reference to this Court. Petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
Interest on delayed payment under Section 50(1) of the Central Goods and Services Act, 2017.

Analysis:

1. Interest on Delayed Payment:
The judgment pertains to interest on delayed payment under Section 50(1) of the Central Goods and Services Act, 2017. The court noted that the matter is directly covered by previous orders in W.A.Nos.2127 and 2151 of 2019. These orders were a result of a previous case where a Division Bench had divergent views, leading to the matter being referred to a third Judge. The third Judge concurred with one of the earlier judgments, which upheld the order related to interest on delayed payment.

2. Previous Orders and Disputes:
The judgment references the previous order dated 13.06.2019 in W.P.No.15624 of 2019, which was later appealed by the Revenue. The Division Bench had conflicting opinions, leading to the involvement of a third Judge whose decision aligned with one of the earlier judgments. The current judgment aims to resolve the matter based on the operative portion of the previous order dated 13.06.2019.

3. Current Decision and Directives:
In the present case, the Revenue claimed interest at Rs.8,29,955, which was disputed by the petitioner-assessee. The court then issued directives for the petitioner to demonstrate undisputed payments to the satisfaction of the respondents within a specified timeline. If the demonstration is successful, the impugned notice will be set aside. However, failure to demonstrate as required will result in the dismissal of the writ petition, allowing the impugned notice to continue. The first and second respondents are instructed to consider the petitioner's stand and communicate their decision within a week if the demonstration is successful.

4. Conclusion and Costs:
The court disposed of the captioned writ petition with the provided directives, emphasizing no costs to be awarded. The associated Writ Miscellaneous Petitions (WMPs) were also closed without any costs. The judgment ensures a structured approach to resolving the issue of interest on delayed payment, maintaining fairness and adherence to legal procedures under the CGST Act.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the key aspects of the case, the legal background, and the specific directives issued by the court to address the matter effectively.