2023 (6) TMI 679 - HC - GST

Rejection of claim made by the petitioner before the 2nd respondent liquidator of M/s Albanna Engineering India Pvt Ltd. - rejected on the ground that the same claim was being adjudicated by the Central Authorities under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act - HELD THAT - The proceedings before the Central Authorities relate to the provisions of the Finance Act, 1994 and for the period up to June 2017, and not to any claim under the GST Laws, this original petition is disposed off permitting the petitioner to file a fresh application before the 2nd respondent along with a copy of the proceedings of the Central Authorities. On receipt of such an application the 2nd respondent shall de novo adjudicate the claim of the petitioner, notwithstanding the fact that the earlier claim of the petitioner was rejected and the said order had been upheld by the National Company Law Tribunal. On a fresh petition being filed by the petitioner, the 2nd respondent shall endeavor to adjudicate the same without any further delay.

Summary

Issues involved: Jurisdiction of Central Authorities under CGST Act, rejection of claim by liquidator, de novo adjudication

Jurisdiction of Central Authorities under CGST Act:
The petitioner's claim was rejected by the liquidator on the basis that the same claim was being adjudicated by the Central Authorities under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act (CGST Act). The National Company Law Tribunal upheld the rejection, citing that the matter was already under adjudication by the Central GST for the taxable value of invoices issued by the company. However, the Senior Government Pleader argued that the proceedings before the Central Authorities were related to pre-GST periods and service tax under the Finance Act, 1994, not under GST laws. The Tribunal permitted the petitioner to raise a de novo claim after the conclusion of proceedings before the Central Authorities.

Rejection of claim by liquidator:
The liquidator rejected the petitioner's claim on the grounds that it was already being adjudicated by the Central Authorities. The Tribunal directed the liquidator to consider the claim as 'De Novo' if the claim before the Central GST was dismissed. The learned counsel for the 2nd respondent stated that the petitioner was allowed to file a fresh application after the conclusion of proceedings before the Central Authorities. The High Court disposed of the original petition, permitting the petitioner to file a fresh application before the 2nd respondent for de novo adjudication of the claim, despite the earlier rejection and the Tribunal's decision upholding the same.

De novo adjudication:
The High Court, after considering the arguments presented, allowed the petitioner to file a fresh application before the 2nd respondent for de novo adjudication of the claim. The court emphasized that the proceedings before the Central Authorities were not related to claims under the GST Laws but were in relation to the Finance Act, 1994, and for the period up to June 2017. The 2nd respondent was directed to adjudicate the fresh claim without delay upon its submission by the petitioner along with the relevant proceedings of the Central Authorities.