2020 (8) TMI 203 - HC - GST

Maintainability of petition - right to appeal - Validity of assessment order - Bihar Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 - HELD THAT - There are no reason as to why the appropriate appellate authority would not accept a hard copy of the appeal and decide the same in accordance with law. We only hope and expect the appropriate authority to consider and decide the appeal expeditiously on its merit and with reasonable dispatch. Petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues involved:
1. Prayer for issuance of writ of certiorari to quash Assessment Orders and demand notices for two Assessment Years.
2. Delay in filing appeal and seeking a date of hearing before the Commissioner.
3. Acceptance of appeals under the Bihar Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 through electronic mode.
4. Exclusion of the period spent pursuing the petition for the purpose of limitation.
5. Expectation for expeditious consideration and decision on the appeal by the appropriate authority.

Analysis:
1. The petitioner sought the issuance of a writ of certiorari to quash the Assessment Orders and demand notices for two Assessment Years. The court noted that the Statute allows the petitioner the right to file an appeal under the Bihar Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017. It was observed that appeals were not being accepted through electronic mode, and the court emphasized that the appropriate appellate authority should accept hard copies of appeals and decide them in accordance with the law.

2. The petitioner also requested the condonation of delay in filing an appeal and fixing a date of hearing before the Commissioner. The court directed that the period spent pursuing the petition would be excluded for the purpose of limitation. Additionally, it was mentioned that the issue of limitation would not hinder the petitioner if the appeal was preferred by a specified date.

3. The issue of accepting appeals electronically was a point of contention. The court highlighted that the appeals should be accepted in hard copy format and assured that any appeal submitted within the statutory period would be considered, heard, and decided in accordance with the law. It was emphasized that the parties should not face unnecessary delays in the process.

4. The court emphasized the exclusion of the time spent pursuing the petition for the purpose of limitation. It was clarified that the petitioner would not face limitations if the appeal was filed by a mutually agreed-upon date. This provision aimed to ensure that the petitioner's rights were safeguarded despite any delays in the legal process.

5. Lastly, the court expressed its expectation for the appropriate authority to promptly consider and decide on the appeal based on its merits and with reasonable dispatch. Both parties were urged not to seek unnecessary adjournments to expedite the resolution of the matter. The petition was disposed of with these terms, emphasizing the need for a swift and fair resolution of the appeal.