2020 (12) TMI 893 - HC - GST

Interest liability on Net cash liability - section 50(1) read with Section 75 (12) and 79 of CGST Act, 2017 - HELD THAT - The writ petition stands disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to file a detailed representation before opposite party no.5- Superintendent, Central Excise GST, Bhawanipatna Range, Bhawanipatna within a period of three weeks from today. If such representation is filed, the same shall be disposed of by passing a reasoned order, in accordance with law as well as the decision of the GST Council. Petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues: Challenge to interest liability under CGST Act, 2017 based on a letter issued by Superintendent, Central Excise & GST.

Analysis:
The petitioner challenged a letter dated 19.02.2020 issued by the Superintendent, Central Excise & GST, Bhawanipatna Range, Bhawanipatna, regarding interest liability under Section 50(1) read with Section 75(12) and 79 of the CGST Act, 2017. The petitioner contended that the direction for payment of interest in the impugned letter was misconceived, citing a decision from the 39th GST Council Meeting on 14th March, 2020. The Council had decided that interest would be charged on Net Cash Liability retrospectively from 01.07.2017, clarifying that interest would apply only on Net Cash Liability, which is Gross Liability minus Input credit available.

The petitioner further argued that since a related matter had already been disposed of by the Court in a previous order dated 17.03.2020, the present writ petition should be disposed of in line with that order. Considering the facts and submissions, the Court disposed of the writ petition, granting the petitioner liberty to file a detailed representation before the Superintendent, Central Excise & GST, Bhawanipatna Range, Bhawanipatna within three weeks. The Court directed that if such a representation is filed, it should be disposed of by passing a reasoned order, in compliance with the law and the decision of the GST Council mentioned earlier.

Additionally, the Court ordered that no coercive action should be taken against the petitioner until a decision is made on the representation. The writ petition was thus disposed of, with a provision for the petitioner's representation and a directive to refrain from coercive measures during the decision-making process. Furthermore, due to ongoing COVID-19 restrictions, the petitioner's counsel was advised to use the soft copy of the order available on the High Court's website or a printout equivalent to a certified copy, as per the Court's notice dated 25.03.2020.