9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (11) TMI 1341 - HC - GSTMaintainability of petition - avaialbility of alternative remedy - Appeal admitted due to non-compliance with sub-sections (1) (4) of Section 107 of the Odisha Goods and Services Tax Act 2017 - It is contended that the petitioner has already deposited 10% of the demanded tax amount before the first appellate authority and as there is no second appellate forum this Court should entertain this writ petition. HELD THAT - Since the petitioner wants to avail the remedy under the provisions of law by approaching 2nd appellate tribunal which has not yet been constituted as an interim measure subject to the Petitioner depositing entire tax demand with in a period of fifteen days from today the rest of the demand shall remain stayed during the pendency of the writ petition. List this matter along with W.P.(C) No.6684 of 2023 on the date fixed therein.
The High Court of Orissa, presided over by Acting Chief Justice Dr. B.R. Sarangi and Mr. Justice Murahari Sri Raman, addressed a writ petition filed by the petitioner challenging the 1st appellate order dated 02.06.2023 from the Joint Commissioner of State Tax, CT & GST (Appeal), Balasore. The appeal was not admitted due to non-compliance with sub-sections (1) & (4) of Section 107 of the Odisha Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner argued that they are not liable for the tax and penalty and have already deposited 10% of the demanded tax. However, the absence of a Second Appellate Tribunal necessitated the High Court's intervention.
Mr. Sunil Mishra, representing the CT & GST Organization, argued against condoning the delay in filing the appeal, noting the appellate authority's lack of discretion to extend the delay beyond one month after three months from the order's communication. He stated that the petitioner must pay an additional 20% of the disputed tax to pursue an appeal before the yet-to-be-constituted Second Appellate Tribunal. The court issued a notice to the opposite parties, with Mr. Mishra accepting on their behalf. The court ordered the petitioner to deposit the entire tax demand within fifteen days, staying the rest of the demand during the writ petition's pendency. The matter is to be listed alongside W.P.(C) No.6684 of 2023 on the scheduled date.
|
