Appellate order was stayed pending the constitution of the Appellate Tribunal.

By | January 22, 2025
(Last Updated On: January 23, 2025)

Appellate order was stayed pending the constitution of the Appellate Tribunal.

Summary in Key Points:

  • Issue: What interim relief can be granted to an assessee who wishes to appeal an order but cannot do so because the Appellate Tribunal has not been constituted?
  • Facts: The assessee sought to appeal an order before the GST Appellate Tribunal, but the Tribunal had not yet been constituted.
  • Decision: The High Court, following the decision in Maa Tarini Traders v. State of Odisha, granted an interim stay on the impugned order, subject to the assessee depositing a percentage of the disputed tax amount.

Analysis:

The High Court ruled in favor of the assessee, granting an interim stay on the operation of the impugned order. This was done to protect the assessee’s interests while the Appellate Tribunal remained unconstituted. The court relied on the precedent set in Maa Tarini Traders v. State of Odisha and ordered the following:

  • Conditional Stay: The stay on the impugned order is conditional on the assessee depositing 10% of the disputed tax amount for filing the appeal and a further 10% of the remaining disputed tax.
  • Protection of Assessee’s Rights: This interim relief ensures that the assessee’s right to appeal is not denied due to circumstances beyond their control (the non-constitution of the Tribunal).

Important Note: This case highlights the High Court’s role in ensuring access to justice for taxpayers, even in situations where the designated appellate mechanisms are not yet functional. By granting interim relief, the court prevents potential prejudice to the assessee and upholds the principles of natural justice. This approach reflects a commitment to fairness and provides a practical solution to a common problem faced by taxpayers in the GST regime.

Refer 12 GST CASE LAW 22.01.2025

Gobinda Chandra Behera
v.
Commissioner of CT and GST
Arindam Sinha and
WP(C) No.171 of 2025
I.A. No.234 of 2025
JANUARY  7, 2025
.
K.K. Sahoo, Adv. for the Petitioner. D. Das, Adv. (Additional Standing Counsel) for the Respondent.
ORDER
WP(C) no.171 of 2025 and I.A. no.234 of 2025
1. Mr. Sahoo, learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioner and submits, his client is aggrieved by order dated 28th November, 2024 made by the First Appellate Authority. It wants to appeal therefrom to the Tribunal but it has not yet been constituted. In the circumstances assessees and the department were complying with directions made on order dated 16th February, 2024 by the First Division Bench in a batch of writ petitions, lead case being WP(C) no.42015 of 2023 (M/s. Maa Tarini Traders v. State of Odisha and others).
2. The directions included requiring the assessee to deposit 10% of the disputed amount of tax on filing the appeal and further 20% of remaining disputed tax, for the impugned order to be stayed.
3. He submits, his client is up against State revenue. There was notification dated 16th August, 2024 made by Central revenue reducing latter deposit to 10%. Now, State revenue has correspondingly notified on 29th October, 2024. In the circumstances, the writ petition be disposed of as covered by order dated 16th February, 2024 (supra) with modification for deposit of 10% of remaining disputed tax for impugned order to remain stayed.
4. Mr. Das, learned advocate, Additional Standing Counsel appears on behalf of State revenue.
5. We accept submission made on behalf of petitioner regarding corresponding notification reducing requirement of the deposit to 10% of disputed tax for impugned first appellate order to remain stayed. The deposit be made accordingly.
6. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.
Category: GST

About CA Satbir Singh

Chartered Accountant having 12+ years of Experience in Taxation , Finance and GST related matters and can be reached at Email : Taxheal@gmail.com