2024 (10) TMI 935 - HC - GST

Tax Dispute Deposit Challenge Fails: 50% Payment Requirement Upheld Against Petitioner's Modification Request

Reddy Enterprises Versus The State of AP, Union of India, The Assistant Commissioner (ST), The Managing Director, The Principal Secretary Rev. (Excise) Development.

Reddy Enterprises Versus The State of AP, Union of India, The Assistant Commissioner (ST), The Managing Director, The Principal Secretary Rev. (Excise) ... Issues:1. Application for modification/relaxation of the condition of deposit of 50% of the tax component.2. Interpretation of the judgment dated 24.03.2023 and subsequent orders by the Hon'ble Apex Court.3. Clarification sought by the petitioner regarding the deposit amount.4. Rejection of the application for modification/relaxation.Analysis:The matter before the High Court of Andhra Pradesh involved an application (I.A. No. 2 of 2023) filed by the petitioner seeking modification or relaxation of the condition of depositing 50% of the tax component as directed in the judgment dated 24.03.2023. The petitioner challenged an order by the Assessing Authority under Section 74(5) of the GST Act, 2017. The judgment dated 24.03.2023 set aside the Assessment Order subject to the petitioner depositing 50% of the tax component within a specified period. The petitioner subsequently filed a Special Leave to Appeal which was dismissed by the Hon'ble Apex Court on 17.05.2023, with directions for the Assessing Officer to re-examine the matter.The petitioner, instead of seeking clarification as permitted by the Hon'ble Apex Court, filed the current application for modification of the deposit condition. The petitioner argued that a substantial amount had already been paid, exceeding 50% of the total tax assessed. However, the High Court clarified that the amount paid by the petitioner was not in compliance with the specific direction in the judgment dated 24.03.2023, which clearly mentioned the required deposit amount. The Court emphasized that the petitioner was directed to deposit 50% of the tax component mentioned in the judgment, and the amount already paid did not fulfill this requirement.Ultimately, the High Court rejected the application for modification/relaxation of the deposit condition, stating that the judgment dated 24.03.2023 had been affirmed by the Hon'ble Apex Court, allowing only for clarification of the order. The Court held that since the petitioner did not seek clarification as permitted, the application for modification was not maintainable. Thus, the application (I.A. No. 2 of 2023) was rejected based on the clear directive in the original judgment and subsequent orders by the Hon'ble Apex Court.