TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Legal Challenge Succeeds: Full Tax Payment Enables Penalty Appeal Despite Procedural Delays Under Statutory Provisions</h1> <h3>Sri. Balu Jayaraman Versus The Assistant Commissioner (ST), Chennai</h3> HC allowed petitioner to file a statutory appeal challenging 100% penalty despite delay, after full discharge of tax and interest liability. The court ... Imposition of 100% penalty - wrongful availment of Input Tax Credit - Late Filing of Writ Petition - Petitioner seeks an opportunity to contest the liability towards penalty by way of statutory appeal - HELD THAT:- By taking into account the fact that the entire tax and interest liability was discharged and that an appeal was not filed earlier since the petitioner intended to discharge liability to that extent, it is just and appropriate that the petitioner be permitted to file a statutory appeal only insofar as it pertains to penalty. Petition is disposed of by permitting the petitioner to file a statutory appeal only with regard to the penalty imposed under impugned order dated 12.09.2023 within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. If such statutory appeal is filed within the aforesaid period, the appellate authority is directed to receive and dispose of the same on merits without going into the question of limitation. Issues involved: Challenge to imposition of 100% penalty, delay in filing statutory appeal, discharge of tax and interest liability.Imposition of 100% Penalty:The order dated 12.09.2023 was challenged primarily due to the imposition of 100% penalty in relation to alleged wrongful availment of Input Tax Credit. The petitioner sought to contest the penalty liability through a statutory appeal after discharging the tax and interest liability as per receipts issued for payments made.Delay in Filing Statutory Appeal:The learned counsel for the petitioner explained that the statutory appeal was not filed earlier because the petitioner chose to discharge the tax and interest liability first. The writ petition was filed after the limitation period had expired, but it was noted that the entire tax and interest liability had been paid between 14.02.2024 and 18.03.2024.Discharge of Tax and Interest Liability:Considering that the petitioner had already discharged the entire tax and interest liability before filing the writ petition, the court deemed it appropriate to allow the petitioner to file a statutory appeal specifically addressing the penalty imposed under the impugned order dated 12.09.2023. The court directed the appellate authority to receive and decide on the appeal without considering the question of limitation, if filed within two weeks from the date of receipt of the court's order.Conclusion:The court disposed of the petition by permitting the petitioner to file a statutory appeal solely concerning the penalty within a specified timeframe, without costs. Additionally, the related motions were closed as a consequence of the judgment.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
