Facts of the Case
The petitioner, M/s Jai Maa Constructions and
Consultancy, challenged the order passed by the Additional Commissioner of
State Tax (Appeals), whereby its GST appeal was dismissed at the admission
stage solely on the ground of delay.
The petitioner also challenged the ex-parte order
passed by the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax cancelling its GST
registration without granting a proper opportunity of hearing or allowing the
petitioner to submit its reply.
The petitioner further sought restoration of its
GST registration, de-freezing of its attached bank account and protection from
coercive recovery proceedings.
The petitioner contended that the delay in filing
the appeal occurred due to the restrictions prevailing during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Issues Involved
- Whether the appellate authority was justified in rejecting the GST
appeal solely on the ground of limitation.
- Whether cancellation of GST registration through an ex-parte order
without granting adequate opportunity of hearing violated the principles
of natural justice.
- Whether the delay caused due to COVID-19 restrictions deserved to
be condoned.
- Whether coercive recovery proceedings could continue while the
appeal remained pending.
Petitioner's Arguments
- The GST registration was cancelled through an ex-parte order
without providing sufficient opportunity to file a reply or present its
case.
- The appeal was dismissed only because of delay without examining
the merits of the case.
- The delay occurred due to COVID-19 restrictions and deserved to be
condoned.
- The petitioner had already deposited the statutory pre-deposit
required for hearing of the appeal.
- The attachment of the bank account and recovery proceedings caused
serious hardship.
Respondent's Arguments
The State submitted that it had no objection if the
matter was remanded to the Appellate Authority for fresh adjudication.
The Revenue agreed that while deciding the appeal
afresh, the question of limitation should not come in the way and the appeal
could be examined on merits.
The department also agreed that no coercive action
would be taken during the pendency of the appeal.
Court Order / Findings
The Patna High Court observed that the delay in
filing the appeal stood sufficiently explained due to the COVID-19
restrictions.
Accordingly, the Court:
- Quashed the appellate order rejecting the appeal on limitation.
- Directed the Appellate Authority to condone the delay.
- Ordered that the appeal be decided strictly on merits.
- Directed that proper opportunity of hearing be provided to all parties.
- Directed the authority to pass a reasoned speaking order.
- Ordered immediate de-freezing/de-attachment of the petitioner's
bank account, if attached.
- Directed that no coercive recovery proceedings should be initiated
during the pendency of the appeal.
- Directed the petitioner to cooperate with the appellate
proceedings.
- Clarified that it had expressed no opinion on the merits of the
dispute and left all issues open.
Important Clarification
This judgment reiterates that:
- Genuine delay attributable to the COVID-19 period deserves liberal
consideration.
- Appeals should ordinarily be decided on merits rather than rejected
on technical grounds.
- Cancellation of GST registration without providing adequate
opportunity of hearing is contrary to the principles of natural justice.
- During the pendency of remanded proceedings, coercive recovery
measures should ordinarily remain stayed.
- Authorities are expected to pass reasoned speaking orders after
granting full opportunity to the affected taxpayer.
Sections Involved
- Section 29 of the Central Goods and
Services Tax Act, 2017 – Cancellation of Registration.
- Section 107 of the Central Goods and
Services Tax Act, 2017 – Appeals to Appellate Authority.
- Principles of Natural Justice.
- COVID-19 Limitation Relief Principles recognized by Courts.
Link to
download the order -
https://www.mytaxexpert.co.in/uploads/1784614306_1601compressed.pdf
Disclaimer
This content is shared strictly for general
information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify
the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal,
professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim
all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared
with the assistance of AI tools.
0 Comments
Leave a Comment