High Court Quashes Orders, Allows Further Proceedings

The High Court quashed the order-in-appeal and assessment order, directing the petitioner to appear before the authority for further proceedings after depositing the full amount. It did not rule on the declaration of certain sections and rules as ultra vires, leaving it open for future consideration. While not granting a specific stay on the demand notice, the court instructed the appellate authority to decide the appeal promptly. The attachment order was withdrawn, and the petitioner's bank accounts were unfrozen. The petition was disposed of based on mutually agreeable terms, with liberty for further legal remedies and proceedings to be conducted digitally.

---

---

Issues:
1. Quashing of order-in-appeal and assessment order
2. Declaration of certain sections and rules as ultra vires
3. Stay on demand notice
4. Quashing of attachment order
5. Disposal of petition and interlocutory applications

Quashing of Order-in-Appeal and Assessment Order:
The petitioner sought a writ to quash the order-in-appeal dated 28/01/2021 and the assessment order-in-original dated 06/03/2020, along with the consequential demand notice for tax, interest, and penalty. The High Court noted that the impugned order lacked essential reasons for dismissal, thus prejudicing the petitioner's case. The petitioner had deposited the full amount, making the appeal ripe for consideration on merits. The Standing Counsel had no objection to remanding the matter to the appellate authority for a fresh consideration. Consequently, the High Court set aside the impugned order and directed the petitioner to appear before the authority for further proceedings.

Declaration of Certain Sections and Rules as Ultra Vires:
The petitioner also sought a declaration that Section 16(4) of the Central/Bihar Goods and Service Act, 2017, and Rule 61(5) of the Central/Bihar Goods and Service Rules, 2017, were ultra vires certain provisions of the Constitution and the CGST/BGST Act, 2017. However, the High Court did not express any opinion on the merits of this issue, leaving it open for future consideration.

Stay on Demand Notice:
Additionally, the petitioner requested a stay on the demand notice issued for the tax amount, interest, and penalty. The High Court did not grant a specific stay but directed the appellate authority to decide the appeal expeditiously, preferably within two months, while granting the parties the opportunity to present essential documents.

Quashing of Attachment Order:
The petitioner sought the quashing of an attachment order issued by respondent no. 5, arguing it was without competence and jurisdiction. The High Court did not delve into the merits of this issue but directed the withdrawal of the attachment order and the unfreezing of the petitioner's bank accounts, restraining the respondents from taking coercive action.

Disposal of Petition and Interlocutory Applications:
The High Court disposed of the petition based on mutually agreeable terms, including setting aside the impugned order, providing an opportunity for the petitioner to present documents, and emphasizing cooperation and expeditious resolution. The court reserved liberty for the parties to explore further legal remedies and left all issues open for future adjudication. The proceedings were to be conducted, if possible, through digital mode during the pandemic, with liberty for the petitioner to challenge the order if necessary. The interlocutory applications were also disposed of accordingly.

---