2024 (4) TMI 778 - HC - GST

Maintainability of petition - Appellate Tribunal has not been constituted - this Writ Petition filed to review the order passed by the 1st respondent Deputy Commissioner(ST) GST (Appellate Authority)/1st respondent herein - HELD THAT - The order does not call for any interference. The order does not suffer from any of the vices which would render the impugned order amenable/susceptible to a review under Art.226 of the Constitution of India. The order is also well reasoned and also does not suffer from any short coming. Therefore, the Writ Petition is liable to be dismissed. However, considering the fact that the petitioner has paid the disputed tax on 27.07.2022, the only relief the petitioner can seek is for payment of interest in installment. As per Sec.80 of the TNGST Act, 2017, the petitioner has to approach the Commissioner. This Writ petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to approach the Commissioner within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of this order.

Summary

Issues:
The judgment involves a Writ Petition seeking a Writ of Certiorarified mandamus to quash an appeal order and waive further payments demanded by the respondent.

Details of the Judgment:

1. Background and Appeal Dismissal:
The petitioner filed a Writ Petition against an order dismissing their appeal and demanding interest payment. The petitioner had surrendered registration, believing no further payments would be demanded. The appeal rejection was contested due to the absence of an Appellate Tribunal.

2. Respondents' Argument:
The respondents argued that the petitioner must pay interest on the tax liability, with no scope for reduction. They suggested approaching the Commissioner under section 80 of the TNGST Act, 2017, for payment in installments.

3. Judicial Consideration:
The court reviewed the arguments and the impugned order, which detailed the tax and interest levied. It cited relevant sections of the Act regarding interest rates and installment payments. The court found no grounds for interference under Article 226 of the Constitution.

4. Decision and Relief:
The court ruled that the order was valid, dismissing the Writ Petition. However, it allowed the petitioner to seek installment payment of interest by approaching the Commissioner within 30 days. Recovery proceedings were stayed pending the application, with a warning of consequences for non-compliance.

5. Conclusion:
The judgment concluded by dismissing the Writ Petition, granting the petitioner 30 days to approach the Commissioner for installment payment. Failure to do so would result in the respondents proceeding legally. No costs were awarded, and the related Writ Miscellaneous Petition was closed.