2024 (7) TMI 911 - HC - GST

Imposition of interest - contention of petitioner is that taxes were paid with a delay of 700 days and not 2080 days - mismatch between the petitioner's GSTR 3B return and the GSTR 1 statement - HELD THAT - The impugned order records that the tax payer paid the tax amount, but did so belatedly. Therefore, the only aspect that remains to be considered is with regard to interest. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that taxes were paid with a delay of 700 days and not 2080 days. In these circumstances, subject to payment of interest to the extent admitted, it is necessary that the petitioner be provided an opportunity. The impugned order dated 30.12.2023 is set aside only in so far as the interest liability is concerned subject to the petitioner discharging interest liability on the basis that the period of delay was 700 days instead of 2080 days. Such liability shall be discharged within 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order - Petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to imposition of interest in an order related to assessment period 2017-2018.

Analysis:
The petitioner contested the imposition of interest in an order dated 31.12.2023 concerning the assessment period 2017-2018. The petitioner argued that there was a mismatch between their GSTR 3B return and GSTR 1 statement, but the tax liability had been discharged. The petitioner claimed that interest was calculated based on a delay of 2080 days, while they asserted the delay was only 700 days, requesting reconsideration.

Analysis:
The respondent, represented by Mr. C. Harsha Raj, AGP (T), contended that natural justice principles were followed through intimation, show cause notice, and a personal hearing. It was emphasized that there was no discretion regarding interest liability.

Analysis:
The impugned order acknowledged the belated payment of taxes by the petitioner, leaving the interest aspect for consideration. The petitioner's argument of a 700-day delay instead of 2080 days was deemed significant. Consequently, the court set aside the order in terms of interest liability, requiring the petitioner to discharge the interest within 15 days based on the 700-day delay. The petitioner was granted the opportunity to respond to the show cause notice on interest liability, with the respondent directed to issue a fresh order within three months upon satisfaction of the interest payment.

Analysis:
The writ petition was disposed of without costs, with connected miscellaneous petitions closed as per the above terms.