2025 (2) TMI 70 - HC - GST

Recovery of outstanding dues in cases wherein first appeal has been disposed of till Appellate Tribunal comes into operation - Circular No.224/18/2024-GST dated 11th July 2024 issued by the Ministry of Finance - HELD THAT - Having considered the materials on record as also taking note of the fact that the Appellate Tribunal is yet to be constituted the petition should be heard. Since the petitioner has been able to make out a prima facie case there shall be an unconditional stay of the demand of the Appellate order dated 14th June 2023 for a period of two weeks from date. In the event the petitioner makes payment of 10% of the balance amount of tax in dispute in addition to the amount already deposited in terms of Section 107(6) of the said Act within two weeks from date the interim order passed herein shall continue till the disposal of the writ petition or until further order whichever is earlier. Let affidavit-in-opposition to the present writ petition be filed within a period of six weeks from date reply if any be filed within one week thereafter.

The judgment involves a writ petition challenging an appellate order dated 14th June 2023, issued by a respondent authority. The petitioner relies on a circular issued by the Ministry of Finance, which outlines guidelines for the recovery of outstanding dues in cases where the first appeal has been disposed of, pending the establishment of an Appellate Tribunal.

1. ISSUES PRESENTED and CONSIDERED

The core legal issues considered in this judgment include:

Whether the appellate order dated 14th June 2023 should be stayed pending the establishment of the Appellate Tribunal.
The applicability of Circular No. 224/18/2024-GST dated 11th July 2024, which provides guidelines for staying recovery of dues when an appeal is intended but the Appellate Tribunal is not yet operational.
The conditions under which a taxpayer can benefit from the stay of recovery proceedings, particularly concerning the pre-deposit requirements under Section 112 of the CGST Act.

2. ISSUE-WISE DETAILED ANALYSIS

Issue 1: Stay of Appellate Order

Legal Framework and Precedents: The case revolves around the provisions of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act, specifically Section 112, which deals with appeals and the conditions for stay of recovery during the appeal process.
Court's Interpretation and Reasoning: The Court noted that since the Appellate Tribunal has not yet been constituted, the petitioner has made a prima facie case for the stay of the appellate order.
Key Evidence and Findings: The Court considered the Ministry of Finance's circular, which provides for a stay of recovery if the taxpayer intends to appeal and complies with the pre-deposit requirements.
Application of Law to Facts: The Court applied the guidelines from the circular, determining that an unconditional stay of the demand was warranted for a limited period, given the petitioner's intention to appeal and the absence of the Tribunal.
Treatment of Competing Arguments: The State's counsel suggested that the writ petition be heard under the usual terms of Section 112(8) of the CGST Act, which the Court found reasonable given the circumstances.
Conclusions: The Court granted an unconditional stay of the appellate order for two weeks, with the possibility of extension if the petitioner complies with additional pre-deposit conditions.

Issue 2: Applicability of Ministry of Finance Circular

Legal Framework and Precedents: The circular issued by the Ministry of Finance outlines the procedure for staying recovery when an appeal is intended but the Tribunal is not operational.
Court's Interpretation and Reasoning: The Court interpreted the circular as providing a mechanism for taxpayers to stay recovery by making a pre-deposit and filing an undertaking to appeal once the Tribunal is operational.
Key Evidence and Findings: The Court accepted the circular as a valid guideline for the current situation, where the Appellate Tribunal is not yet constituted.
Application of Law to Facts: The Court found that the petitioner's compliance with the circular's requirements justified the stay of recovery proceedings.
Treatment of Competing Arguments: The Court balanced the State's position with the petitioner's rights under the circular, concluding that the stay was appropriate.
Conclusions: The Court's decision to stay the order aligns with the circular's intent to protect taxpayers during the interim period before the Tribunal's establishment.

3. SIGNIFICANT HOLDINGS

Core Principles Established:

The Court recognized the importance of providing relief to taxpayers when the appellate process is hindered by the non-establishment of the Tribunal.
The judgment underscores the necessity of adhering to procedural guidelines provided by the Ministry of Finance to ensure fairness in tax recovery processes.

Final Determinations on Each Issue:

The Court granted an unconditional stay of the appellate order for two weeks, contingent upon the petitioner making a 10% additional pre-deposit of the disputed tax amount.
The stay will continue until the disposal of the writ petition or further orders, subject to compliance with the specified conditions.

The Court directed the filing of affidavits within stipulated timelines, allowing for further proceedings post the exchange of affidavits, thereby ensuring a structured approach to resolving the writ petition.

← Previous Next →