Case Law Details
Amit Kumar Singh Vs Assistant Commissioner of State Tax (Calcutta High Court)
In a recent ruling, the Calcutta High Court addressed the plight of taxpayers under the West Bengal Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The case involved challenges against orders under Sections 74 and 107 of the Act, highlighting the absence of a functional GST Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT).
The petitioner, Amit Kumar Singh, contested the order dated March 30, 2023, and the subsequent appellate decision of January 9, 2024, citing grounds for appeal under Section 112 of the Act. Due to the non-existence of an Appellate Tribunal, Singh approached the High Court seeking relief.
The crux of the matter revolved around the financial implications of deposit requirements pending appeal, exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic’s economic fallout. Singh’s counsel argued for exemption from pre-deposit obligations to prevent irreparable harm.
Conversely, state representatives emphasized compliance with tax obligations pending appeal, asserting that the petition should be dismissed unless taxes were paid or secured.
After hearing arguments, the Court balanced the interests of justice with Singh’s financial constraints. It ordered Singh to deposit 5% of the disputed tax amount, supplementing previous deposits, to stay any further demands until September 2024 or further court orders.
The Court also directed Singh to compile all relevant documents into a paper book for expedited review, alongside ensuring the Appellate Authority’s records were presented promptly.
In conclusion, the Calcutta High Court’s decision provides temporary respite to taxpayers affected by delays in GST Appellate Tribunal operationalization.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
1. Affidavit of service filed in Court today is taken on record.
2. The present writ petition has been filed, inter alia, challenging the order dated 30th March, 2023 passed under Section 74 of the West Bengal Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the “said Act”), as also the appellate order dated 9th January, 2024, passed under Section 107 of the said Act.
3. Ms. Roy Choudhury, learned advocate representing the petitioner submits that an appeal is maintainable from the order passed under Section 107 of the said Act before the Appellate Tribunal. Unfortunately, no Appellate Tribunal within the meaning of Section 112 of the said Act has been constituted. In such circumstances, the present writ petition has been filed.
4. It is submitted that there are substantial grounds for maintaining an appeal under Section 112 of the said By drawing attention of this Court to page 42 of the writ petition, it is submitted that by reasons of Covid- 19 pandemic, the petitioner suffered immensely and unless, this Court exempts the petitioner from making payment of the pre-deposit ordinarily required for maintaining the appeal in terms of Section 112 of the said Act, the petitioner shall suffer irreparable loss.
5. Mr. Siddiqui, learned advocate representing the State respondents on the other hand, submits that although, the writ petition may be maintainable by reasons of the Appellate Tribunal not being constituted, however, the instant writ petition should not be entertained unless, the petitioner pays the taxes, already determined, or secures the same.
6. Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties and having considered the materials on record, I am of the view that this matter should be heard.
7. Having regard to the aforesaid and taking into consideration the financial constraints of the petitioner, I am of the view that justice would be sub-served if the petitioner is directed to deposit with the GST authorities the sum equal to 5 % of the remaining amount of tax in dispute, in addition to the deposit already made under sub-section (6) of Section 107 of the said Act.
8. In the event, the aforesaid payment is made within a period of two weeks from date, demand, if any, raised by the respondents in terms of the order dated 9th January, 2024, shall remain stayed till the end of September, 2024, or until further order, whichever is earlier.
9. Since the parties agree that the writ petition can be disposed of on the basis of the records available before the Appellate Authority, I direct the petitioner to enclose all documents filed before the Appellate Authority in a compilation, in the form of a paper book.
10. Let such paper book be filed on/or before the matter is taken up next, with an advance copy thereof to the learned advocate representing the respondents.
11. The respondents are also directed to ensure that the records of the Appellate Authority are placed before this Court, when the matter is taken up next.
12. List this matter in the Combined Monthly List of July, 2024.
Author Bio
