2025 (2) TMI 614 - HC - GST

Unconditional two-week stay of demand granted pending hearing; petitioner to be heard despite unconstituted appellate body

The HC, hearing a challenge to an appellate order, held that because the Appellate Tribunal is not yet constituted and the petitioner made out a prima ... Challenge to appellate order - petitioner relies on Circular No.224/18/2024-GST dated 11th July, 2024 issued by the Ministry of Finance debarring the guidelines for recovery of outstanding dues in cases wherein first appeal has been disposed of, till Appellate Tribunal comes into operation - HELD THAT:- Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties and having considered the materials on record as also taking note of the fact that the Appellate Tribunal is yet to be constituted, it is opined that the petition should be heard. Since, the petitioner has been able to make out a prima facie case, there shall be an unconditional stay of the demand of the Appellate order dated 24th July, 2024 for a period of two weeks from date. Let affidavit-in-opposition to the present writ petition be filed within a period of six weeks from date, reply, if any, be filed within one week thereafter. The High Court of Calcutta issued a judgment in a writ petition challenging an appellate order dated July 24, 2024. The key issues presented and considered in this case include the challenge to the appellate order, the applicability of Circular No. 224/18/2024-GST issued by the Ministry of Finance, and the stay of recovery proceedings until the Appellate Tribunal is constituted.The Court considered the Circular issued by the Ministry of Finance, which provides guidelines for recovery of outstanding dues in cases where the taxpayer decides to file an appeal against the order of the appellate authority. The Circular clarifies the procedure for making payments of pre-deposit amounts and availing the benefit of stay from recovery of the remaining demand. It outlines the process for taxpayers to navigate to the Electronic Liability Register (ELL) Part-II to select the order against which payment is intended to be made. The Circular also requires taxpayers to file an undertaking/declaration with the proper officer to appeal against the appellate authority's order within specified timelines.The Court heard arguments from both parties and noted that the Appellate Tribunal is yet to be constituted. Considering that the petitioner has established a prima facie case, the Court granted an unconditional stay of the demand from the appellate order for two weeks. Additionally, if the petitioner makes a payment of 10% of the balance amount of tax in dispute within two weeks, the interim order will continue until the disposal of the writ petition or until further order.The Court directed the State to file an affidavit-in-opposition within six weeks and allowed for a reply to be filed within one week thereafter. The parties were given liberty to mention after the exchange of affidavits.In conclusion, the Court granted an interim stay of the demand from the appellate order, subject to the petitioner making a specified payment within a designated timeframe. The judgment emphasized the importance of complying with the Circular's requirements and the need for timely filing of affidavits in the proceedings.