2023 (4) TMI 1268 - HC - GST

Staying operation of communication dated 9.3.2023, which is from the office of the Deputy Collector, Customs, Mundra - Erroneous refund granted to the petitioner - Constitutional validity of Rule 96(10)(b) of Central Goods and Services Tax / Gujarat Goods and Services Tax, 2017 - HELD THAT - It is an admitted position that other petitions relying the vires of Rule 96(10)(b), have been entertained by this Court and the same are pending consideration. In those petitions, interim relief is granted to those petitioners concerned which is evident from the orders annexed in the compilation of Civil Application. When the authorities have acted to address the aforesaid communication dated 09.03.2023 even when the main petition is pending, the petitioner deserves to be treated at par with the other similarly situated petitioners, to be entitled to ad-interim relief - by way of interim relief, it is directed that the adjudication proceedings may go on, however, there shall be no coercive recovery against the petitioner. Application allowed.

Summary

Issues involved:
The issues involved in the judgment include a prayer for interim relief to stay the operation of a communication from the Customs authorities requiring payment of an amount claimed to be an erroneous refund, a challenge to the vires of Rule 96(10)(b) of Central Goods and Services Tax / Gujarat Goods and Services Tax, 2017 on the grounds of Article 14 of the Constitution of India, and a request to set aside proceedings initiated by the authority.

Interim Relief Prayer:
The applicant sought interim relief to stay the operation of a communication dated 9.3.2023 from the office of the Deputy Collector, Customs, Mundra, demanding payment of Rs. 6,49,73,456, claimed to be an erroneous refund granted to the petitioner. The applicant argued that the communication was received after the filing of the Special Civil Application, and therefore, the request for stay was justified at this stage.

Challenge to Rule 96(10)(b):
The petition aimed to declare Rule 96(10)(b) of Central Goods and Services Tax / Gujarat Goods and Services Tax, 2017 as ultra vires of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Additionally, the petitioner sought to set aside proceedings initiated by the authority following a letter dated 24.11.2020. The prayer in the petition also included a request to transfer the proceedings.

Ad-Interim Relief Granted:
Considering the pending petitions challenging the vires of Rule 96(10)(b), where interim relief was granted to other petitioners, the court directed that the adjudication proceedings may continue, but there should be no coercive recovery against the petitioner. The court opined that the petitioner should be treated on par with other similarly situated petitioners and be entitled to ad-interim relief.

Conclusion:
The Civil Application was allowed, and it was disposed of with the direction that adjudication proceedings could proceed, but there should be no coercive recovery against the petitioner.