9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (3) TMI 991 - HC - GSTMaintainability of petition - availability of statutory remedy of appeal against the impugned order - non-constitution of the Tribunal - HELD THAT - Due to non-constitution of the Tribunal, the petitioner is deprived of his statutory remedy under Sub-Section (8) and Sub-Section (9) of Section 112 of the B.G.S.T. Act - Under the circumstances, the petitioner is also prevented from availing the benefit of stay of recovery of balance amount of tax in terms of Section 112 (8) and (9) of the B.G.S.T Act upon deposit of the amounts as contemplated under Sub-section (8) of Section 112. The respondent State authorities have acknowledged the fact of non-constitution of the Tribunal and come out with a notification dated 11.12.2019 for removal of difficulties, in exercise of powers under Section 172 of the B.G.S.T Act which provides that period of limitation for the purpose of preferring an appeal before the Tribunal under Section 112 shall start only after the date on which the President, or the State President, as the case may be, of the Tribunal after its constitution under Section 109 of the B.G.S.T Act, enters office. This Court in the case of ANGEL ENGICON PRIVATE LIMITED VERSUS STATE OF BIHAR, ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX 2023 (3) TMI 879 - PATNA HIGH COURT has disposed of the writ petition with certain observations and directions, allowing certain liberty to the petitioner - The instant writ petition is disposed of in the same terms, allowing the petitioner liberty as has been granted to the petitioner in above case. Petition allowed.
Issues involved:
- Quashing of orders related to GST appeal and recovery of due GST - Non-constitution of the Tribunal affecting statutory remedies - Acknowledgment of non-constitution by State authorities - Previous judgment providing directions for availing statutory benefits Quashing of Orders Related to GST Appeal and Recovery of Due GST: The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking to quash orders related to GST appeal and recovery of due GST. The orders in question were passed without granting an opportunity of being heard and lacked reasoned explanations. The petitioner sought relief through a writ of certiorari to annul these orders. Additionally, the petition requested to restrain the respondents from taking coercive actions for tax recovery during the pendency of the writ application. The court acknowledged the petitioner's grievances and provided directions in line with previous judgments to ensure fair treatment. Non-constitution of the Tribunal Affecting Statutory Remedies: Due to the non-constitution of the Tribunal, the petitioner was deprived of availing statutory remedies under the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act. This lack of Tribunal formation hindered the petitioner from pursuing appeals and obtaining the benefit of stay on tax recovery. The respondent State authorities recognized this issue and issued a notification to address the problem. The court emphasized the importance of the Tribunal's constitution for enabling statutory remedies and directed the petitioner to follow specific procedures once the Tribunal becomes functional. Acknowledgment of Non-constitution by State Authorities: The State authorities acknowledged the non-constitution of the Tribunal and issued a notification to address the challenges faced by taxpayers in availing statutory remedies. The notification clarified that the period for appealing before the Tribunal would commence only after the Tribunal's President assumes office post-constitution. This acknowledgment highlighted the significance of Tribunal establishment for facilitating legal processes related to tax appeals and recovery. Previous Judgment Providing Directions for Availing Statutory Benefits: In a previous judgment related to a similar case, the court provided specific directions to address the challenges arising from the non-constitution of the Tribunal. The judgment emphasized the petitioner's right to avail statutory benefits, including the stay on tax recovery, by following prescribed procedures once the Tribunal is constituted. The court balanced the equities by requiring the petitioner to file an appeal within the specified period after the Tribunal's formation, failing which the authorities could proceed with legal actions. The judgment aimed to ensure fairness and procedural compliance in handling tax-related disputes.
|
