9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (4) TMI 962 - HC - GSTAttachment of bank account of the partners of the petitioner firm and the properties of the partners of the petitioner firm - appeal was dis-allowed on the ground of non-payment of pre-deposit - HELD THAT - On the basis of the provision of Sub-section (6) of Section 107 of CGST Act, it was submitted by learned senior advocate for the petitioner that disputing the entire amount of GST levied on the product chewing tobacco. According to his case, the total output of the product chewing tobacco is to the tune of Rs. 9,88,31,089/-. It is the case of the petitioner that for supply of the composite product, the demand is Rs. 26 crores and Rs.20 crores for the subsequent year. It was submitted that the petitioner has already paid about Rs. 28 crores. Therefore, the question of predeposit does not arise as there is no admitted amount. On the other hand, the case of the department is that the product chewing supari, lime and tobacco are composite products and that the petitioner cannot adjust the tax. The petitioner has arguable issues. Notice and notice as to interim relief returnable on 28.04.2023.
Issues involved:
The issues involved in the judgment are setting aside decisions reflected in letters/orders by Assistant Commissioner of State Tax and Deputy Commissioner of State Tax, appeal against order disallowance, scrutiny proceedings under Section 73 of the Act, applicability of GST rates on different products, attachment of bank account and properties of partners, and non-payment of pre-deposit amount for appeal. Setting aside decisions by Assistant Commissioner of State Tax: The petitioner sought to set aside decisions reflected in letters/orders issued by the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, which led to the attachment of the bank account and properties of the partners of the petitioner firm. The petitioner challenged the orders dated 22.07.2022 and 02.09.2022, contending that they were not strict attachment orders under Section 83 of the Act. Disallowed appeal due to non-payment of pre-deposit: Another issue was the appeal disallowed by the Deputy Commissioner of State Tax on 11.10.2022, based on non-payment of a pre-deposit amount as required under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017. The appellant argued that there was no admitted amount, disputing the entire GST levied on the product chewing tobacco, and thus, the question of pre-deposit did not arise. Scrutiny proceedings and applicability of GST rates: The petitioner, engaged in the trading business of supplying chewing tobacco, tobacco products, specialized supari, and lime pouches, faced scrutiny proceedings under Section 73 of the Act. The controversy arose regarding the application of GST rates on different products supplied by the petitioner, with the department considering the products as composite, while the petitioner maintained they were distinct goods attracting different GST rates. Conclusion: The Court heard arguments from the learned senior advocate and advocate for the petitioner, considering the nature of the orders issued by the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax and the Deputy Commissioner of State Tax. The Court also examined the applicability of the pre-deposit requirement for filing an appeal under Section 107 of the Act. The petitioner raised substantial arguments regarding the disputed GST amount and the composite nature of the products supplied. The case presents arguable issues, with further proceedings scheduled for a later date.
|
