Ess Infraproject Private Limited Vs Union of India (Bombay High Court)
The issue of the saving of Rule 5A(2) of Service Tax Rules, 1992 on introduction of CGST Act, 2017 is an issue that requires detailed consideration. This would be appropriately done at the final hearing. Thus, granting of interim relief at this stage would tantamount to granting final relief at the stage of admission. Moreover, the balance of convenience is against the petitioner. The Respondents seeks to carry out audit in terms of Rule 5A of Service Tax Rules, 1994 and Section 174 of the CGST Act for the period prior to the introduction of CGST Act. Grant of interim relief at this stage would prevent the respondents from carrying out audit as permitted under Rule 5A of Service Tax Rules, 1994 and Section 174(2)(e) of the CGST Act. At the final hearing, if the challenge is negatived, there would be a delay in conducting the audit which would then result in difficulty as papers and persons who are in a position to be respond to audit queries may not be available and/or their memories may fail. Besides any action to be taken pursuant to the audit may become time barred, if not already so. No prejudice will be caused to the petitioners if it subjects itself to audit at this stage. If any further proceedings are taken on the basis of audit report against the petitioners, they are at liberty to move the Court for interim relief. Such an application, if made which would be considered at that point of time by the court to which served an application is made.
FULL TEXT OF THE HIGH COURT ORDER /JUDGEMENT
