Indian Bank Vs Assistant Commissioner CGST and Central Excise (Madras High Court)
The Madras High Court considered Indian Bank’s challenge to rejection of its GST waiver application concerning Maharashtra operations. A combined order under Section 73 was issued on 21.03.2023 for the petitioner’s Tamil Nadu and Maharashtra operations. The petitioner’s Maharashtra appeal was rejected on 31.01.2024 on jurisdictional grounds. It subsequently filed Form GST SPL-02 under Section 128A. The waiver was partly allowed for Tamil Nadu but rejected for Maharashtra.
The petitioner contended that the proper officer who issued the Section 73 order could consider the waiver application and that neither Section 128A nor Rule 164 deprived that officer of jurisdiction. Revenue relied on CBIC Circular No.238/32/2024-GST, stating that the proper officer for Form GST SPL-02 was the officer responsible for recovery under Section 79.
The Court noted that the application fell under Section 128A(1)(b) and had been filed on 26.06.2025 within the applicable due date, with the tax liability discharged before 31.03.2025. Although the Court accepted that the proper officer under Rule 164 and Circular No.238 is the officer referred to in Section 79, it found that neither Section 79 nor Chapter XVIII specified the basis for identifying that officer. Considering the combined Section 73 order covering both locations and the single-application framework under Rule 164, the Court held there was no statutory basis to decline jurisdiction over the Maharashtra waiver claim. The rejection was partly set aside and the matter remanded for reconsideration after reasonable opportunity to the petitioner.
