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>High Court Permits GST Appeal with Rs. 2.5 Lakh Deposit, Directs Merits-Based Review Under Section 50(1)</h1> <h3>M/s. Alamelu Construction Versus The Assistant Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Puducherry</h3> The HC allowed the petitioner to file a statutory appeal challenging GST interest and penalty liability under Section 50(1) of CGST Act, 2017. The ... Interest and penalty liability - Petitioner discharged GST liability before issuance of SCN - Petitioner sought permission to approach the appellate authority by way of statutory appeal - Benefit of the proviso to Section 50(1) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - HELD THAT:- Petition is disposed of by permitting the petitioner to present a statutory appeal before the appellate authority subject to the condition that the petitioner remits a sum of Rs. 2.5 lakhs (Rupees two lakhs fifty thousand only) towards interest liability as agreed to within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Subject to remittance of the amount specified above, if a statutory appeal is presented within the aforesaid period of three weeks, 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 interest and penalty liability u/s Section 50(1) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.The petitioner challenged an order dated 27.09.2023 related to interest and penalty liability, which was issued after proceedings initiated by a show cause notice dated 27.02.2023. The petitioner had already discharged the GST liability on specific dates in 2019 through the electronic credit ledger. The impugned order was issued based on these circumstances.The petitioner claimed entitlement to the proviso to Section 50(1) of the CGST Act, stating that as the tax liability was discharged before the show cause notice, they should not be liable to pay interest or penalty. The petitioner sought permission to appeal to the appellate authority.The respondent argued that the petitioner collected taxes but failed to remit them, only discharging the liability after the proceedings began, thus not meeting the requirements of the proviso to Section 50(1).The impugned order indicated that the petitioner had indeed discharged the GST liability on specific dates in 2019, with the challenge limited to interest and penalty. Despite 100% penalty imposition, it was deemed just to allow the petitioner to file a statutory appeal, even though the time limit had expired, subject to certain terms.The petitioner agreed to remit Rs. 2.5 lakhs as a condition for being allowed to present a statutory appeal. Consequently, the court disposed of the case by permitting the petitioner to file the appeal upon remittance of the specified amount within three weeks, directing the appellate authority to consider the appeal on merits without considering the question of limitation.This summary provides a detailed overview of the judgment, highlighting the key arguments and decisions made by the court regarding the challenge to interest and penalty liability under Section 50(1) of the CGST Act, 2017.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
