Gunnuru Satya Rama Murthy Vs Assistant Commissioner Stint and Others (Andhra Pradesh High Court)
Conclusion: Section 2 (84) of the CGST Act had already made that distinction by placing “Association of Persons” in Sub-clause ‘f’ while, placing “Society” in Sub-clause ‘l’. Therefore, society would not fall within the purview of the term “Association of Persons” set out under Section 94 (1) of the CGST/SGST Act. Consequently, no proceedings could be initiated against assessee, who was a member/Secretary of the Public Association, registered under the Act of 2001.
Held: In the instant case, an amount of Rs.2.04 Crores had become due from the Society. As assessee was the Secretary of the Society, notice under Section 79 of the Central / State Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 had been issued for recovery of the dues under the AP GST Act, 2017. Under a notice, the Sub-Registrar, Chodavaram, Anakapalli District was informed about the arrears of the Society and the requirement to attach the properties of assessee, for recovery of such dues. The details of the property that were sought to be attached were also set out in Form GST DRC-16. On this basis, the Sub-Registrar, Chodavaram, was said to have kept the properties in the prohibitory list. Respondents contended that Section 94 of the CGST/ SGST Acts, empowers the Tax Authorities to recover the dues of any firm, association of persons or Hindu Undivided Family from any member of such a firm or association of persons. Accordingly, taxes were sought to be recovered from assessee on the ground that he was a member of the Society, which was an association of persons. Assessee would contend that such a view was impermissible as Society had been dealt with separately under the GST Act itself and an association of persons could not be treated as a Society. It was held that Section 2 (84) of the CGST Act had already made that distinction by placing “Association of Persons” in Sub-clause ‘f’ while, placing “Society” in Sub-clause ‘l’. In the present case, the Society in question had not been registered under the Act of 1860, but under the Act of 2001. A closer look at Section 2 (84) (l) would show that, the Society, mentioned in this provision, was not a Society registered under the Act of 1860, but a Society, as defined under the Act of 1860. Further Sub-section 2 and Sub-section 3 stipulated that a Society in which un-incorporated association of individuals was a member or a firm was a member, was not liable to be registered under the Act of 2001. This would clearly indicated that a Society registered under the Act of 2001 meet all the requirements of a Society, as defined under the Act of 1860. In view of the above, it must be held that the Society would not fall within the purview of the term “Association of Persons” set out under Section 94 (1) of the CGST/SGST Act. Consequently, no proceedings could be initiated against assessee, who was a member/Secretary of the Public Association, registered under the Act of 2001.
