Interim relief granted; appeal against GST order held maintainable u/s 112, to await tribunal constitution

HC held that the impugned order is appealable under Section 112 of the West Bengal GST Act corresponding to the CGST Act and that the proper remedy lies before the Appellate Tribunal. Since the Tribunal has not yet been constituted, HC exercised writ jurisdiction only to grant interim protection to the petitioner to prevent prejudice during the interregnum. HC directed that, once the Tribunal becomes functional, the petitioner may file an appeal within the extended period prescribed in Clause 4.2 of the Circular dated 18 March 2020. The writ petition was disposed of on these terms.

---

---

Issues:
The challenge to the order passed in appeal under Section 107 of the West Bengal Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 for the period 201-2019.

Summary:
The petitioner challenged the impugned order in a writ petition due to the non-constitution of the Appellate Tribunal, as the order is appealable. The petitioner sought protection based on a judgment of the Bombay High Court regarding the non-constitution of the Appellate Tribunal. The State argued that the petitioner must deposit the remaining tax amount in dispute to be favored with an interim order, citing Section 112(8) of the Central Goods and Services Act, 2017. The petitioner relied on a judgment of the Calcutta High Court regarding compliance with pre-deposit conditions. The Court considered the non-constitution of the Appellate Tribunal and a circular issued by the Government regarding the extension of the period of limitation for filing appeals. Following the Bombay High Court's approach to protect taxpayers, the Court granted protection to the petitioner until the Appellate Tribunal becomes functional. The petitioner was given liberty to approach the Appellate Tribunal within a reasonable time frame after its constitution, and the impugned order was stayed for two weeks after the prescribed appeal filing period. The Court emphasized that the petitioner can raise all contentions before the Appellate Tribunal and made no order as to costs.

---