GST Appeal Stayed: Interim Relief Granted Due to Non-Constitution of Tribunal
Summary in Key Points:
- Issue: Should interim relief be granted to the assessee who is unable to file an appeal due to the non-constitution of the Appellate Tribunal?
- Facts: The assessee sought to appeal an order passed by the first appellate authority. However, the Appellate Tribunal was not yet constituted, preventing the assessee from filing their appeal.
- Decision: Following the precedent set in Maa Tarini Traders v. State of Odisha, the court granted an interim stay on the impugned order, subject to the assessee depositing 10% of the disputed tax amount.
Important Note: This decision highlights the challenges faced by taxpayers when appellate tribunals are not constituted. It demonstrates the court’s willingness to provide interim relief in such situations, recognizing that the assessee’s right to appeal is hindered by factors outside their control. The requirement to deposit a portion of the disputed tax amount balances the interests of the taxpayer and the revenue while ensuring that the assessee’s appeal can be heard once the tribunal is functional. This ruling provides a practical solution to address the issue of delayed justice due to administrative delays in constituting tribunals.
HIGH COURT OF ORISSA
Sai Mahaveer Suppliers and Constructions
v.
Chief Commissioner of CT and GST
Arindam Sinha and M.S. Sahoo, JJ.
W.P.(C) No.27696 of 2024
JANUARY 10, 2025
Mrs. Z.M. Wallace, Adv. for the Petitioner. S. Mishra, Standing Counsel and A. Kedia, Jr. Standing Counsel Advs. for the Respondent.
ORDER
1. Mrs. Wallace, learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioner and submits, her client is aggrieved by order dated 23rd September, 2024 made by the First Appellate Authority. She wants to appeal therefrom to the Tribunal but it has not yet been constituted. In the circumstances assessees and the department th 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. She submits, her 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. Mishra, learned advocate, Standing Counsel appears on behalf of State revenue and Mr. Kedia, learned advocate, Junior Standing Counsel appears on behalf of Central 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.