9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (7) TMI 1510 - HC - GSTTime barred writ petition - petitioner has not filed statutory appeal in time - HELD THAT - This Court is of the view that the issue regarding merits cannot be decided under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. At best, the petitioner can be given a liberty to file statutory appeal before the Deputy Commissioner (GST) (Appeals)(State Tax), Madurai and Tirunelveli, although the limitation is expired as on date. This Court is, therefore, inclined to exercise its discretion in favour of the petitioner, considering the fact that the petitioner is facing severe financial constraints and is being proceeded with under the provisions of SARFAESI Act, 2002 and its account had become a non-performing asset - Since the Deputy Commissioner (GST) (Appeals)(State Tax), Madurai and Tirunelveli, is not a party in this proceedings, the Deputy Commissioner (GST) (Appeals)(State Tax), Madurai and Tirunelveli is suo motu impleaded as second respondent. Petition disposed off.
Issues:
Challenging an impugned order dated 28.12.2023 under GST for the assessment year 2017-18 due to failure to file statutory appeal in time. Analysis: The petitioner approached the High Court against the impugned order passed by the respondent for the assessment year 2017-18. The respondent argued that the Writ Petition was time-barred and should be dismissed due to delays, citing a Supreme Court decision. It was contended that the appellate remedy was also time-barred as per the GST Enactments and should be dismissed accordingly. On the petitioner's side, it was argued that there was an unjust demand, unutilized credit, financial difficulties leading to being classified as a sick unit, and initiation of proceedings under the SARFAESI Act, 2002. The petitioner requested an opportunity to present the case afresh. The Court acknowledged the submissions from both sides but noted that the issue of merits could not be decided under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. However, considering the petitioner's financial constraints and the situation under the SARFAESI Act, 2002, the Court decided to grant the petitioner the opportunity to file a statutory appeal before the Deputy Commissioner (GST) (Appeals)(State Tax), Madurai and Tirunelveli, despite the expiration of the limitation period. The Court exercised its discretion in favor of the petitioner due to the severe financial constraints faced, leading to the account being classified as a non-performing asset. To facilitate the appeal process, the Deputy Commissioner (GST) (Appeals)(State Tax), Madurai and Tirunelveli, was suo motu impleaded as the second respondent. The Court directed the petitioner to file the appeal within 30 days of receiving a copy of the order, with a requirement to deposit 10% of the disputed tax from its electronic cash register as per Section 107 of the respective GST enactments. Upon compliance, the second respondent would entertain and dispose of the appeal on merits and in accordance with the law expeditiously, preferably within three months. In conclusion, the Writ Petition was disposed of with the above directions, without any costs incurred. The connected miscellaneous petition was also closed as a result of the judgment.
|
