Solai Venkateshwara Stores Vs The State Tax Officer
Date: June 26, 2024
Subject Matter
Time-barred appeal allowed to be filed with 25% Pre-Deposit
Summary
In this case, the petitioner, a proprietrix concern, has challenged two impugned orders from the GST department dated 30.05.2023 and 26.05.2023, which confirmed tax demands for the assessment years 2021-22 and 2022-23. The confirmed amounts included significant tax, interest, and penalty, leading to a total demand of ₹14,12,932 for the year 2021-22 and ₹6,14,914 for the year 2022-23. The petitioner argued that the circumstances surrounding the demolition of a sister concern's godown, which led to the inspection and subsequent demand for taxes, were unfair. Additionally, the petitioner could not file the statutory appeals in a timely manner due to her husband’s hospitalization. The court, recognizing the need for the petitioner to have an opportunity to contest the orders, allowed her to file an appeal before the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (GST), Trichy. The court imposed a condition that the petitioner needs to file the appeal within 30 days and deposit an additional 25% of the disputed tax on top of what had already been recovered. The Appellate Deputy Commissioner was directed to dispose of the appeal on its merits expeditiously, preferably within three months. If the petitioner fails to comply, the relief granted would automatically be revoked. The case was disposed of, with no costs imposed.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
By this common order, these two Writ Petitions are disposed of. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondents.
2. The petitioner/Proprietrix concern is before this Court challenging the impugned orders dated 30.05.2023 and 26.05.2023 bearing reference No. GSTIN: 33AUVPL3939J1Z0 for the assessment years 2021-22 and 2022-23, respectively, whereby the demands proposed in the show cause notices, that preceded the impugned orders, have been confirmed.
3. By these impugned orders, the following amounts have been confirmed:
S. No | Assessment year | TaxRs. | InterestRs. | PenaltyRs. | FeeRs. | Others Rs. | TotalRs. |
1. | 2021-22 | 5,21,354.00 | 2,70,224.00 | 6,21,354.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 14,12,932.00 |
2. | 2022-23 | 2,81,756.00 | 51,402.00 | 2,81,756.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 6,14,914.00 |
4. It is the case of the petitioner that the godown of the sister’s concern was demolished and therefore, the stocks were transferred and were found in the premises of the petitioner at the time of inspection on 13.05.2022.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after the order was passed, the petitioner’s husband Mr. Bhuvanesh kumar fell ill and was hospitalized. Hence, the petitioner could not file statutory appeal before the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (GST), Trichy, in terms of Section 107 of the respective GST enactments.
6. It is submitted that the Department has, now, attached the bank account of the petitioner towards tax liability, interest and penalty for a sum of Rs.20,27,846/- on 22.05.2024.
7. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has also paid a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- in cash and that the Department itself has recovered a sum of Rs.40,096/- from the petitioner’s Electronic Credit Ledger.
8. It is submitted that the petitioner may be given one opportunity to file statutory appeal as the demand that has been confirmed is unjustified and the interest and penalty that has been imposed on the petitioner as a cash getting effect in the petitioner’s tax liability.
9. Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondents, the Court is inclined to exercise the discretion partly in favour of the petitioner by granting relief to file statutory appeal before the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (GST), Trichy. For the aforesaid purpose, Appellate Deputy Commissioner (GST), Trichy is suo motu impleaded as second respondent in these Writ Petitions.
10. The petitioner shall file an appeal within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order together with the deposit of another 25% of the disputed tax over and above the amount that is said to have been recovered from the petitioner. Subject to above, the second respondent shall entertain the petitioner’s appeals and dispose of on merits and in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of three months of filing of appeal. In case the petitioner fails to file such an appeal with pre-deposit as ordered, the relief granted by this Court shall stand automatically revoked, sine
These Writ Petitions are disposed of, with above directions. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.