Article Section | |||||||||||
Home Articles Goods and Services Tax - GST CA Bimal Jain Experts This |
|||||||||||
Appeal allowed where pre-deposit made through Form GST DRC-03 due to technical glitch |
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||
Discuss this article |
|||||||||||
Appeal allowed where pre-deposit made through Form GST DRC-03 due to technical glitch |
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||
The Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of M/S. SRI SAPTHAGIRESWARA OIL MILL VERSUS THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ST) (FAC) , THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER (ST) , THE DEPUTY ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ST) , STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, UNION OF INDIA, M/S. RAVI TRADERS - 2024 (2) TMI 477 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT set aside the Impugned Rejection Order in case where the appeal filed was rejected on the ground that, pre-deposit was made through Form GST DRC-03 instead of the required Form APL-01, due to technical glitch. Facts: Manjunatha Oil Mill (“the Petitioner”) aggrieved by the rejection of appeals filed against the assessment orders passed by the Revenue Department (“the Respondent”), filed a writ petition, on the ground that, the pre-deposit was made through Form GST DRC-03 instead of the required Form APL-01 due to technical glitch, therefore, the Respondent is not empowered to consider the amount paid through Form GST DRC-03 as 10 percent pre-deposit for filing of appeal. Held: The Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of M/S. SRI SAPTHAGIRESWARA OIL MILL VERSUS THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ST) (FAC) , THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER (ST) , THE DEPUTY ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ST) , STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, UNION OF INDIA, M/S. RAVI TRADERS - 2024 (2) TMI 477 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT set aside the appeal rejection order and remanded back the matter to the Respondent for further consideration on factual aspects and condonation of delay. Relevant Provision: Section 107(6) of the CGST Act: “(6) No appeal shall be filed under sub-section (1), unless the appellant has paid- (a) in full, such part of the amount of tax, interest, fine, fee and penalty arising from the impugned order, as is admitted by him; and (b) a sum equal to ten per cent. of the remaining amount of tax in dispute arising from the said order subject to a maximum of twenty-five crore rupees, in relation to which the appeal has been filed. Provided that no appeal shall be filed against an order under sub-section (3) of section 129, unless a sum equal to twenty-five per cent. of the penalty has been paid by the appellant.” (Author can be reached at [email protected])
By: CA Bimal Jain - March 14, 2024
|
|||||||||||
Discuss this article |
|||||||||||