2020 (10) TMI 951 - HC - GST

Court directs installment payment of profiteered amount, stays interest & penalty proceedings

The Court issued notice to the respondents and directed the petitioner to deposit the balance principal profiteered amount in installments with the State ... Profiteering - vires of Section 171(3) of CGST Act and Chapter XV of the CGST Rules specifically Rules 126, 127 and 133 of GST Rules - HELD THAT:- Keeping in view the orders passed by this Court in PHILLIPS INDIA LIMITED VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. [2020 (6) TMI 626 - DELHI HIGH COURT] as well as M/S. SAMSONITE SOUTH ASIA PVT. LTD. VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. [2020 (7) TMI 526 - DELHI HIGH COURT] and M/S. PATANJALI AYURVED LTD. VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. [2020 (7) TMI 614 - DELHI HIGH COURT], this Court directs the petitioner to deposit the balance principal profiteered amount i.e. ₹ 25,15,392/- (₹ 55,60,340/- minus ₹ 2,64,778/- minus ₹ 27,80,170/-) with the State Consumer Welfare Fund in six equated monthly installments commencing 02nd November, 2020. - The interest amount directed to be paid by the respondents as well as the penalty proceedings are stayed till further orders. Learned counsel for the parties are directed to file their short written submissions not exceeding three pages each at least one week prior to the next date of hearing. List on 21st December, 2020. Issues:Challenge to final order of National Anti-profiteering Authority (NAPA) | Declaration of Section 171(3) of CGST Act and related rules as unconstitutional | Declaration of NAPA's composition as unconstitutional | Request for installment payment due to Covid-19 impact | Stay on interest amount and penalty proceedingsAnalysis:The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging the final order of NAPA dated 13th April, 2020, alleging profiteering during a specific period. The petitioner sought a declaration that Section 171(3) of the CGST Act and certain rules were ultra vires and unconstitutional, along with questioning the constitutionality of NAPA's composition. The petitioner had already deposited a portion of the alleged profiteered amount and requested to pay the balance in installments due to the Covid-19 pandemic impact.The Court issued notice to the respondents, and counter-affidavits were to be filed within four weeks, with a further four weeks for rejoinder affidavits. Referring to previous judgments, the Court directed the petitioner to deposit the balance principal profiteered amount in installments with the State Consumer Welfare Fund, starting from November 2, 2020. The Court stayed the interest amount and penalty proceedings until further orders, requiring short written submissions from the parties before the next hearing scheduled for December 21, 2020.Overall, the judgment addressed the challenge to the NAPA's final order, constitutional validity of relevant provisions, installment payment request due to Covid-19, and temporary stay on interest and penalty proceedings. The Court provided a structured approach for further proceedings, emphasizing compliance with deposit requirements and submission of written arguments.