Tax Order Challenged: Conditional Stay Granted with Deposit Requirement for Future Appellate Tribunal Appeal

HC disposed of writ petition challenging ex parte tax order under Bihar GST Act. Court granted petitioner liberty to deposit specific sum for stay of recovery, contingent on filing appeal once Appellate Tribunal is constituted. Authorities may proceed per law if appeal not filed within prescribed timeframe after Tribunal's establishment.

---

---

Issues:
1. Challenge to ex parte appellate order dated 14.01.2023 under Bihar Goods And Services Tax Act 2017.
2. Challenge to ex parte order dated 13.01.2021 imposing tax, penalty, and interest.
3. Restraint on recovery of tax, interest, and penalty.
4. Non-constitution of the Appellate Tribunal affecting statutory remedies.
5. Stay of recovery of balance tax amount.
6. Observations and directions in similar cases.

Analysis:
1. The petitioner sought a writ of certiorari to quash an ex parte appellate order dated 14.01.2023 issued by respondent no. 2, rejecting the petitioner's appeal against the order dated 13.01.2021 under Section 74 of the Bihar Goods And Services Tax Act 2017 (Bihar Act 2017). The petitioner also challenged the ex parte order dated 13.01.2021 imposing tax, penalty, and interest for the tax period April 2020 to April 2021. The petitioner further requested a restraint on the recovery of the imposed amounts.

2. Due to the non-constitution of the Appellate Tribunal, the petitioner was unable to avail of the statutory remedy under Section 112 of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act. The petitioner was also prevented from benefiting from the stay of recovery of the balance tax amount as per Section 112(8) and (9) of the Act upon depositing the required sums.

3. The respondent State authorities acknowledged the non-constitution of the Tribunal and issued a notification to address the issue. The notification stipulated that the period of limitation for appealing before the Tribunal would commence only after the Tribunal's President assumes office post-constitution. This situation led to the disposal of a similar writ petition in the case of Angel Engicon Private Limited vs. the State of Bihar & Anr., where certain observations and directions were provided.

4. In line with the Angel Engicon case, the present writ petition was disposed of with similar directions, granting the petitioner liberty to deposit a specific sum to avail the benefit of stay under Section 112(9) of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act. The Court emphasized the need for the petitioner to file an appeal under Section 112 once the Tribunal is constituted and functional, failing which the respondent authorities could proceed further in accordance with the law.

5. The judgment underscored that the statutory relief of stay on deposit of the required amount should not be indefinite and that the petitioner must file an appeal within the specified period after the Tribunal's constitution. Failure to do so would empower the respondent authorities to take further action in the matter.

6. The writ petition was disposed of, providing the petitioner with the same liberty granted in a previous case. The judgment highlighted the importance of timely appeal filing post-Tribunal constitution and reiterated the consequences of not availing the statutory remedy within the specified period.

---