Demand for interest and penalty on GSTR-3B returns leads to duplication; impugned order quashed and relief granted.

Two distinct authorities imposed interest and penalty for delayed filing of GSTR-3B returns for the same period, producing duplication of proceedings and resulting in double taxation; where duplication existed the impugned administrative demand was unsustainable and was quashed, with consequential relief granted to the petitioner. The decision clarifies that concurrent or overlapping penal demands for the identical tax period that produce double liability will be subject to judicial review and can be set aside through writ jurisdiction, thereby removing the duplicate fiscal burden.

---

---

Issues: Whether the impugned administrative order imposing interest and penalty for delayed filing of GSTR-3B (April 2018 to March 2019) is liable to be quashed on the ground that a second order for the same period by a different authority results in duplication of proceedings and double taxation.

Analysis: The Court considered the fact that two distinct orders were issued by different authorities for the identical period and the identical default, resulting in two quantified interest demands for the same delay. The availability of an earlier quantified demand which was paid, and the subsequent issuance of a second demand for the same period and same default, demonstrates duplication of proceedings leading to double liability. The Court treated such duplication as legally untenable because it produces double taxation for the same taxable event and period.

Conclusion: The impugned order dated 22.03.2024 imposing interest and penalty for the specified period is quashed and the petition is allowed in favour of the assessee.

---