2024 (3) TMI 437 - HC - GST

Timely GST Petition Upheld: Petitioner Directed to File Appeal with Commissioner, Ensuring Fair Hearing and Procedural Compliance

HC found the petition under Section 107 of CGST Act, 2017 was timely filed. Despite allegations of pre-deposit evasion, the court did not substantiate the ... Limitation for filing appeal under Section 107 CGST - condonation of delay - principles of natural justice - pre-deposit requirement in appellate proceedings - relegation to statutory appellate forum - expeditious disposal of appeal on remandLimitation for filing appeal under Section 107 CGST - condonation of delay - Petition was filed within limitation and delay was not to be condoned beyond statutory limits. - HELD THAT: - The Court noted that appeals under the Chapter XVIII regime must be filed within 90 days and that condonation of delay is available only for a further period of 30 days. The Writ Petition was filed by e filing on 22.12.2023 challenging the order dated 29.08.2023. Having regard to the filing date and the statutory timelines, the petition is within limitation and therefore maintainable on that ground. This finding makes irrelevant any contention that the petitioner belatedly sought relief before the High Court instead of the appellate authority. [Paras 1]Petition is within limitation.Principles of natural justice - No violation of principles of natural justice in passing the impugned order. - HELD THAT: - The Court examined the departmental show cause notice dated 16.08.2023 which granted seven days to file a reply, afforded an opportunity of personal hearing on 21.08.2023 and warned that failure to appear would lead to an order being passed. The petitioner did not participate in the hearing or file any reply. On these facts the Court held that the petitioner's contention of denial of hearing was incorrect and that the principles of natural justice were not violated. [Paras 3, 4]No breach of natural justice; opportunity was given but not availed.Relegation to statutory appellate forum - pre-deposit requirement in appellate proceedings - expeditious disposal of appeal on remand - Petitioner relegated to file appeal before Commissioner (GST Appeals) within seven days; appellate authority to follow prescribed notice procedure and decide a reasoned order within 30 days. - HELD THAT: - Relying on the principle that where a writ is filed within limitation but statutory appellate remedy exists, the Court may decline to entertain the writ and remit the party to the appropriate appellate forum, the High Court relegated the petitioner to the Commissioner (GST Appeals). The petitioner undertook to file the appeal within seven days. The Commissioner (GST Appeals) was directed to serve notice in accordance with law, to intimate the hearing schedule by email (and the petitioner was precluded from later contending non-receipt of the email), afford hearing and pass a reasoned order considering all contentions within 30 days from filing of the appeal. The Court recorded that the petition was disposed of as withdrawn on these terms. [Paras 5, 6, 7, 8]Petitioner relegated to file appeal within seven days; Commissioner (GST Appeals) to hear and decide within 30 days; petition disposed as withdrawn.Final Conclusion: Writ petition filed within limitation; no breach of natural justice found; petition disposed of as withdrawn and petitioner relegated to approach the Commissioner (GST Appeals) by filing an appeal within seven days, the appellate authority to serve notice by email, hear the matter and pass a reasoned order within 30 days. Issues involved: Challenge to impugned order dated 29.08.2023 under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017; Allegation of evasion of pre-deposit by the Petitioner; Violation of principles of natural justice in the proceedings.Summary:Challenge to Impugned Order:The Petition was filed within the statutory limitation period of 90 days under Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017, with the possibility of condoning the delay for a further 30 days. The Court found the Petition to be within limitation as it was filed on 22.12.2023 through E-filing.Allegation of Evasion of Pre-Deposit:The GST department alleged that the Petitioner approached the Court to avoid making a pre-deposit, referencing a previous order by the Supreme Court. However, the Court did not find this allegation to be substantiated.Violation of Principles of Natural Justice:The Petitioner was served with a notice granting time to reply and show cause on the delay, with an opportunity for a hearing and submission of documents. As the Petitioner did not participate in the hearing or submit a reply, the impugned order was passed. The Court noted that the Petitioner's claim of not being granted a hearing opportunity was incorrect.Relegation to Appeal Forum:Based on the law laid down by the Supreme Court, the Court decided to relegate the Petitioner to the appellate authority, the Commissioner (GST Appeal). The Petitioner agreed to file an appeal within seven days, with a request for an expeditious decision. The Court disposed of the Petition as withdrawn, directing the Petitioner to file the appeal within the specified timeframe.Procedure Before Commissioner (GST Appeals):The Commissioner (GST Appeals) was instructed to follow the legal procedure for hearing, including notifying the Petitioner via Email. The Petitioner was directed not to claim lack of opportunity to read or access the Email notice. The Commissioner was required to pass a reasoned order within 30 days from the filing of the appeal, considering all the Petitioner's contentions.