2023 (3) TMI 870 - HC - GST

Appeal filed by petitioner rejected - rejection merely on the grounds of being barred by limitation - ex-parte order. HELD THAT - The delay stands sufficiently explained on account of COVID-19 restrictions. Revenue, states that he has no objection if the matter is remanded to the Appellate Authority for deciding the appeal afresh. Also, while considering and deciding the appeal, the ground of delay shall not be taken into account and the appeal shall be decided on merits. Also, during pendency of the appeal, no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner. The present petition disposed off in the mutually agreeable terms.

Summary

Issues:
Petitioner seeks relief for quashing ex parte orders, restraining coercive action, and declaring rights related to input tax credit under Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.

Analysis:
The petitioner filed a writ seeking various reliefs, including quashing of ex parte orders issued by the appellate and assessing authorities, restraining coercive action for tax recovery, and seeking declaration on input tax credit rights. The High Court noted that the appeal was rejected based on limitation grounds due to an ex parte order. The Court considered the delay in filing the appeal adequately explained due to COVID-19 restrictions. The Revenue's counsel agreed to remand the matter for a fresh decision without considering the delay as a ground, ensuring no coercive steps during the appeal. The Court accepted the agreement and disposed of the petition with mutually agreeable terms.

The Court quashed the impugned order, restored the appeal, and directed the petitioner to deposit a specified amount for the appeal to be heard on merits. The deposit was without prejudice to the parties' rights, with excess amounts to be refunded. The Court further directed the de-freezing of bank accounts, set a date for appearance before the Appellate Authority, and instructed on the conduct of the appeal proceedings. The Appellate Authority was directed to decide the appeal expeditiously, affording opportunities for hearings, document submissions, and passing a speaking order with reasons.

The Court reserved liberty for the petitioner to challenge the order and for parties to seek other remedies available in accordance with the law. The judgment emphasized expeditious handling of any future proceedings and conducting proceedings through digital mode if possible. The Court did not express any opinion on merits, leaving all issues open for further consideration. The petition was disposed of along with any interlocutory applications, with the respondents undertaking to communicate the order to the appropriate authority electronically.