2021 (10) TMI 578 - HC - GST

Seeking withdrawal of best judgment assessment orders passed - return filed within (granted extended) time or not - period September 2017 to December 2018 - HELD THAT - It is clear that the time was in fact granted to the petitioner to file return within a specified time and the return to be filed within the said time referred to the return under Section 62 (2) and in light of appropriation of tax paid under the wrong head this court by its order of 13.02.2019 had further extended the time within which time returns were to be filed. If that were to be so though the period of 30 days as provided under Section 62 (2) in the peculiar facts of the case in light of permission granted by the court in its order dated 13.02.2019 the petitioner could continue to file the return within the time granted by the Court and the return filed was a return as contemplated under Section 62 (2) which is to be construed to be return filed within the time. If that were to be so the return filed in terms of the order dated 20.09.2018 was a return in terms of Section 62(2) and the best judgment assessment orders passed under Section 62(1) would stand withdrawn viz. assessment orders. The impugned endorsement is set aside and the return filed under Section 62 (2) of the Act is directed to be proceeded with in accordance with law.

Summary

Issues:
Quashing of endorsement and demand in Form-'F', withdrawal of best judgment assessment orders, wrongful appropriation of amount, dismissal of writ petitions, validity of best judgment assessment orders, proper perspective of court's observations, correct filing of returns, fault with the endorsement, interpretation of Section 62(2) of the Act.

Analysis:
The petitioner sought quashing of an endorsement and demand, withdrawal of best judgment assessment orders, and direction to withdraw the orders passed for the period September 2017 to December 2018. The petitioner challenged the attachment orders issued under the CGST Act, which were subsequently lifted by the court with conditions for filing returns. Despite making a deposit, there was a wrongful appropriation of funds, hindering the filing of returns as per court directions. The court directed refund and permitted filing of returns, leading to the filing within the extended time granted.

The petitioner's counsel argued that the impugned endorsement failed to consider the court's previous orders and the correct filing of returns under Section 62(2) of the Act. The respondent contended that the endorsement was technically valid post the dismissal of the writ petition. The court noted the developments and the time granted for filing returns, emphasizing the correct interpretation of Section 62(2) and the withdrawal of best judgment assessment orders.

After hearing both sides, the court concluded that the return filed within the specified time under Section 62(2) should be considered valid, leading to the withdrawal of best judgment assessment orders for various periods. Consequently, the court set aside the impugned endorsement and directed the processing of the return filed under Section 62(2) in accordance with the law, ensuring the correct application of the statutory provisions and court orders.